text:
Specific Cancers
- Adrenal Cancer
- Bile Duct Cancer
- Bladder Cancer
- Bone Cancer
- Brain and Central Nervous Cancer
Breast Cancer
- Advanced Reading
- Cancer FAQs
- Deciding on Treatment
- Managing Side Effects
- Overview
- Prevention and Screening
- Understanding Your Diagnosis
- Carcinoma of Unknown Primary
- Cervical Cancer
- Colorectal Cancer
- Endometrial Cancer
- Esophageal Cancer
- Ewing Sarcoma
- Eye Cancer
- Gallbladder Cancer
- Head and Neck Cancer
- Hodgkin Disease
- Kaposi's Sarcoma
- Kidney Cancer
- Laryngeal Cancer
- Leukemia - Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL)
- Leukemia - Acute Myelocytic (AML)
- Leukemia - Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)
- Leukemia - Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia (CML)
- Leukemia - General
- Liver Cancer
- Lung Cancer
- Malignant Mesothelioma
- Multiple Myeloma
- Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
- Oral Cancer
- Other Cancers
- Ovarian Cancer
- Pancreatic Cancer
- Penile Cancer
- Pituitary Cancer
- Prostate Cancer
- Skin Cancer - Melanoma
- Skin Cancer - Non-Melanoma
- Soft Tissue Sarcoma
- Stomach Cancer
- Testicular Cancer
- Thymus Cancer
- Thyroid Cancer
- Urethral Cancer
- Uterine Cancer
- Vaginal Cancer
- Vulvar Cancer
Alternative Therapy - Overview of Complementary and Alternative Medicine
What is alternative therapy?
In some cases, physicians will recommend, or patients may request, treatment alternatives that are not considered conventional medicine. "Conventional" refers to medicine typically practiced by persons who have M.D. (medical doctor) or D.O. (doctor of osteopathy) degrees, and who suggest treatments that have been scientifically tested, found to be safe and effective, and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Sometimes, however, these physicians may also recommend some non-conventional therapies that may be used to complement, or complete, a treatment plan.
Complementary medicine is any form of therapy used in combination with standard/conventional medicine. Complementary therapy usually serves to relieve symptoms and improve quality of life.
Alternative medicine is used alone, without recommended standard treatment.
The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) defines CAM as a group of diverse medical and healthcare systems, practices, and products that are not generally considered part of conventional medicine.
The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine points out that what is considered to be CAM changes continually, because once those therapies are proven to be safe and effective, they become incorporated into conventional medicine.
What are the different types of complementary and alternative therapies?
The following are some complementary therapies that may be included in a patient's treatment plan:
Diet and herbs
Art therapy
Music therapy
Dance therapy
Physical exercise
Before considering complementary and alternative therapy
Most complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) fields are not standardized or controlled by any Western medical guidelines. You should consult your physician before beginning any complementary or alternative therapy, as some therapies may interfere with standard treatment.
It is important to be an informed healthcare consumer when considering complementary or alternative medicine. Before starting therapy, you should consider the following:
Consult with your physician.
Use your library to research books, articles, and scientific journals.
Use the Internet to do research.
Look for information on controlled, scientific studies on the therapy you are considering.
Talk to others who have actually tried the therapy.
What warning signs may indicate a fraudulent therapy?
According to the American Cancer Society, it is better to avoid treatment with the following warning signs:
The treatment is based on unproven theories.
The treatment promises or guarantees a cure.
The treatment is a secret and can be given only by certain providers.
The treatment requires travel to another country.
Those who provide the treatment discount standard or conventional medicine and/or tell the patient not to use standard or conventional medicine.


text:
I think we should close the Company Complaints and Compliments Section.
This issue came up a year or so ago when we had another thread or two that just seemed to bring out the worst in everyone, and having a dedicated section for this stuff seems to give the discussions disproportionate weight and importance that doesn't reflect the spirit and focus of the site.
I'm not saying people shouldn't post legitimate complaints when they have them, I just don't think the idea of having a dedicated forum section for it is helping anyone.
It seems to encourage the worst behavior in everyone and act as a giant incentive to the worst tendencies in people, and i think it's probably too inviting a target for companies who want to promote themselves or hurt their competition.
If people have complaints or compliments they can post them in one of the other sections of the forum.
So i propose that we move all of the posts in this section to the general software section or living room as appropriate and then remove the empty Complaints section. Thoughts?

subset: commoncrawl


text: Management & Leadership overview faculty program organizations after graduation Business Club Designed for students interested in business, the club provides an outlet for businesses to contribute information on current and upcoming professional practices. The club promotes interaction among students, faculty and business professionals. Membership is open to the entire Le Moyne community. Investment Club The Le Moyne College Investment Club exists to enhance the overall financial knowledge of the members. Using various media sources, members will facilitate sound investments, hence developing skills that will serve as a foundation in the financial world. Marketing Club This club's purpose is to stimulate interest in, to foster a better understanding of, and to encourage sound, ethical practices in marketing. Both an academic and a social organization, the club provides a transition between the classroom and the practicing profession. Speakers are invited to the campus from commerce and industry to present and discuss current marketing techniques. A monthly newsletter is published and marketing projects and consultations are undertaken involving local profit and nonprofit organizations. Membership is open to the entire Le Moyne community.


text:
Nb: infants must be under the age of 2 and
children must be under the age of 12 at the time of
Hotel Le Val Cenis enjoys an exceptional location at the foot of the pistes, near to the village of Val Cenis Lanslebourg. After a thrilling day on the slopes you can unwind in the indoor pool or relax in the comfortable lounge
54 RoomsFor 2 people on half board sharing a twin room with bath and WC. Triple and quad rooms for 2 adults and 1 or 2 children under 16 are also available. Quad rooms comprise of a twin room with a small bunk room (alcove) suitable for children only. During French school holidays the minimum occupancy of triple and quad rooms is 3 or 4.
• Full continental breakfast including croissants, pancakes, yoghurts, cold meats and cheeses • Buffet or packed lunch • themed buffet-style evening meals including savoyard menus, oriental cuisine and a Mexican night • Weekly fondue or raclette evening • FREE wine or juice with mealsPlease Note: During French school holidays the minimum occupancy of triple and quad rooms is 3 or 4.
Iglu acts as a travel agent for disclosed principals/tour operators, further details
of which will be made available at the time of booking. Your holiday contract will
be bound by the tour operators terms and conditions.
Prices are shown for a basic room or unit, can be subject to change and are indicative
until time of booking. Please call on 020 8544 7114 for prices for other travel
and room options for this property.
Prices shown are per person per week based on maximum occupancy. Descriptions and
quality ratings are provided by the Tour Operator (or one of the Tour Operators
where similar holidays are offered by more than one supplier). We reserve the right
to make minor adjustments to the description or rating based on staff and customer
feedback. For payments by credit card, a 2.5% credit card charge (4% for AMEX) will
be added to your invoice. If you pay by a UK issued debit card, there is no charge.
All bookings are subject to a £5 per person Passenger Admin Fee charged by Iglu.com.


text:
Texas on the Potomac
Washington news with a Texas accent
Posts filtered on Tag
An insider's view of the White House Correspondents' Association dinner, with Pulitzer winner Sara Ganim
Texas on the Potomac was pleased to host Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Pulitzer Prize winning reporter Sara Ganim at this year's White House Correspondents' Association dinner. At age 24, Sara last week became the second-youngest Pulitzer winner in history for her outstanding coverage of the Sandusky case that rocked Penn State University. Here are some of her impressions of the black-tie gala. [Read More]


text: Front Group Remote Remote Photos (9) Video View larger SiriusXM Lynx™ Car Kit Play your SiriusXM Lynx portable satellite radio through your car stereo Item #: 220SXIV1 19 Reviews This item is no longer available. Original Price: $19.99 Shop all Car Kits Need help? 1.888.955.6000 Email Chat Ask an expert advisor No pressure, no commission — just lots of good advice from our highly trained staff. Overview Reviews Details Articles & Videos by Zak Billmeier This SiriusXM kit includes a car cradle with dash and vent mounts, a PowerConnect adapter with built-in FM transmitter, an audio cable, a wireless remote, and a magnetic roof-mount antenna — everything you'll need to listen to the Lynx satellite radio in your vehicle. Use either the adhesive dash mount or clip-on vent mount to install the car dock in a convenient spot in your car. The included cable connects the dock to any car stereo with an auxiliary input. If you can't plug into your radio, the handy car dock includes the SiriusXM PowerConnect system that delivers your satellite radio programming through any FM radio. You can twist the large rotary knob to quickly browse and tune channels, or pass your passengers the remote. Your Lynx will stay charged in this dock, whether you're connected via FM transmitter, through the included audio cable, or using the Lynx's Bluetooth® audio streaming capability. The antenna attaches to your roof with its magnetic base, while the PowerConnect adapter plugs right into your car's power port to provide power to the radio. Color-coded connectors on the dock make installation a breeze. The Lynx radio is sold separately. Product Highlights:car accessory kit for SiriusXM LynxTuneMix™ lets you enjoy up to five favorites as one custom channelcar cradle with adhesive dash mount and vent mountaudio cable (stereo minijack to minijack)rotary knob for changing and browsing channelsPowerConnect adapter with built-in FM transmittermagnetic roof-mount antennawireless remotewarranty: 1 yearOur 60-day money-back guarantee SiriusXM Lynx™ Car Kit Reviews Average Customer Review: 19 reviews Review this product Submit a review and then enter to win a $350 rewards card Filter by rating: 5 Star: (0) 4 Star: (0) 3 Star: (0) 2 Star: (0) 1 Star: (0) Review this product: Thanks for taking the time to share your experiences about this product. Please be sure to focus your comments on the product itself. Read our Review Guidelines for more information. Review title * Email Your email won't be visible. Please use the email address that is associated with your order. Display name (e.g., JohnD) Your review will be signed using the display name and location * Your location (e.g., Charlottesville, VA) * Your rating Click on a star to rate the overall product on a scale of 1-5 1500 characters left * Your review Attach a YouTube Review Crutchfield Video Review Guidelines Only submit videos that you made or are authorized to use. Do not submit videos that contain music, video or visuals that are copyrighted and belong to someone else. Please see our Review Guidelines for more information. Enter the URL of your YouTube™ video review or product demonstration. e.g., "http://www.youtube.com/v/o79TWHh598U" 500 characters left Pros 500 characters left Cons * Agree to Terms By checking this box you agree your review becomes the property of Crutchfield, that you are over 18 years of age, that you own or have owned this product, and that you are located within the United States or its territories. Please see our Review Guidelines for more information. We reserve the right (but are not obligated to) review all submissions and edit or remove any review in any manner which we deem necessary. Your review should be posted within seven days. AMAZING PRODUCT!!!! Written By Stephen G, Daly City, CA on Monday, October 14, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) This product is wayyy beyond awesome! The antenna is a whole lot smaller than some of the earlier versions of SiriusXm radio's, it was WAYYY easier to install by myself, and the twisting knob and remote make your driving experience a whole lot more convenient and a whole lot SAFER! I have absolutely NOTHING bad to say about this AMAZING product and will RECOMMEND it to EVERYONE! Pros: Safe, Convenient, Easy to use, Easy to install Cons: NOTHING IS WRONG WITH THIS DEVICE!! 5 STARS! :-D 1 out of 1 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Car Dock Rocks Written By Bill, Indiana on Wednesday, October 02, 2013 Mainly bought the Lynx to use in the dock and have bought additional docks for other vehicles. This dock is easy in/out for the radio and features a control dial with a pretty cool blue led accent light! Pros: Great remote control. Easy to remove radio. All the connections you need for different installs. Cons: None Was this review helpful? Yes No Great accessory for a great product . . . Written By jwz, SoFla on Tuesday, September 24, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Great stuff, works well - don't care for the AC vent attachments. Antenne works very well and the magnet is powerful ! Pros: Quality build, Antenna and cable length, base is sturdy with BIG selector dial. Has a remote! Drove from West Palm to Key West and back, never lost signal. Cons: AC vent attachment Was this review helpful? Yes No Works Great! Written By Jordan, Eau Claire, WI on Tuesday, September 24, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Very easy to install, worked right away. Can't go wrong if you want to stream SiriusXM in your vehicle! In fact, I'm buying a second for my other vehicle! Pros: Easy install, Plug and Play, Includes everything you need. Cons: None. Was this review helpful? Yes No Sirius Car Kit Written By Calltiger, Hoover, AL on Wednesday, September 11, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Great price Pros: All good Cons: None Was this review helpful? Yes No Limited use for other XM radios Written By Bill, Wyoming on Saturday, July 13, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Everything in box was new and as described. Pros: Antenna maybe universal for most older XM radios. Crutchfield has great service and very good prices. Cons: As I now know with most accessory items sold to use on XM radios, very few kit parts can be used with other XM models. I have a Roady xt and Skyfi3 and the antenna was the only piece from this kit that will interchange. I will most likely throw the other parts in the trash. 1 out of 1 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Gnarley farley Written By Gnarley farley, Michigan on Wednesday, July 10, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Super great Pros: Good Cons: None Was this review helpful? Yes No Working great Written By TDB, Ohio on Saturday, May 25, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Worked great once I ran the antenna from the roof. I initially just had it sitting on the dashboard but it lost the signal too much. It took me about a half an hour to run the cable through the panels. I only wish I had a better mounting then the air vent. It's a little flimsy but it's working. Pros: Works well once I ran the antenna out of the car Cons: Can't be lazy and just have the antenna on the dash. Was this review helpful? Yes No Lynx Car Kit Written By MR, San Diego, CA on Saturday, May 25, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) great design, easy to install, works terrific Pros: it's all good Cons: none 1 out of 1 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Easy installation kit Written By KenS, Arizona on Saturday, May 25, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Simple easy setup. Great to use. Pros: Easy setup. Cons: Still have wires hanging everywhere but that was expected. 1 out of 1 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Unbelievable mickey-mouse mess Written By JA, Minneapolis on Saturday, May 11, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Too bad the receiver won't work without this badly designed mess. They supply one of those huge 12V plugs to go into your cigarette lighter. NO USB option for those of us with lots of equipment to plug in and a need to use the much smaller, more convenient multiple-USB adapters in those outlets. At least you can get a non-OEM USB power cord for $8 extra. The mounting system is bizarre. I bought this unit because I want to carry my satellite radio subscription with me in the many cars I drive each year (I drive rentals over long distances). I am not going to use the support pod that they supply that glues permanently to your dash (and destroys it if you ever want to remove it). The mickey mouse vent-louver hooks could work on some louvers, I suppose, but on my own vehicle the louvers are of a size that Sirius's louver clips simply fall off - one bump on the road, and your unit crashes to the floor. Which means the unit with its forest of wires just has to ride on the seat. Worst of all is the antenna - 30 feet of kinky wire that inevitably snarls. They want you to run it through the weatherstripping and otherwise damage the car to locate the antenna outside (once trip through the car wash, that's done for). And you aren't going to take the time to do this with a rental, even if you don't care about damaging it. The antenna works just fine inside the car, thank you. Right on the dash. But what am I supposed to do with this 30 feet of bulky kinky wire that can't be shortened? Pros: None. The receiver unit will * not * work in your car without this. So you * have * to buy it. Cons: Mounting system options are unworkable for many users. Antenna is 30' of kinky wire; you are expected to mount the antenna permanently to the outside of your car. Bulky 12V electrical connector monopolizes power outlet in your car. Was this review helpful? Yes No Car Kit Written By 8Wlr, Omaha,Ne on Sunday, April 07, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) had to get it professionally installed and it still took them 2 hr - tool one look at instructions and knew it was not for me to do on my won Pros: ti works for what I wanted Cons: re-engineer the concept -- too complex given today's technical capabilities Was this review helpful? Yes No Love Written By David K, wooster Ohio on Tuesday, March 26, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) easy to set up Pros: works great 1 out of 1 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Lynx car kit Written By foleym, Gypsum,Co on Monday, March 25, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) As with everything all the cables and mounting hardwear is included for an easy setup. Pros: Everything you need is in this kit. Cons: None 2 out of 2 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Neat and cheap! Written By Chro, Chicago, il on Friday, March 08, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Glad it's cheaper! Pros: Love the extras! Cons: Output is very sensitive! 1 out of 1 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Flimsy Written By janu, missoula, mt on Friday, January 11, 2013 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Ridiculously flimsy if using the air vents. Totally need to revamp the set up and make it STABLE. Cons: See above. Cheesy. Was this review helpful? Yes No SiriusXM Lynx Car Kit Written By Les, Lancaster, SC on Monday, September 24, 2012 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) I ordered the Pro.Fit VSM Mount System along with the car kit that was made for my vehicle. My Lynx radio dock is now mounted securely beside the vehicle's radio. The screws of the Pro.Fit are hidden behind the faceplate of the car radio. It sure makes for a professional installation. I am well pleased with the results. Pros: The dock is a great mount for the Lynx. Cons: I did not consider the dash mount or the vent mount very professional looking. They looked like something just to get you going until you found a better mount like I did with the Pro.Fit. 2 out of 2 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No SiriusXM Lynx™ Car Kit Written By JoeB, Sacramento, CA on Saturday, June 09, 2012 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) The mounting options are limited. Vent mount pretty flimsy. Adhesive mount even worse. Hot weather and Lynx is on the floor. Need to hard mount with screws to keep in place or use suction mount like portable gps. Remote was a joke. Worked for about 1 minute. Still trying to find replacement. Pros: docking station design Cons: mounting options are limited. 2 out of 2 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No SiriusXM Lynx™ Car Kit Written By roboc, waldorf,MD on Thursday, February 02, 2012 Crutchfield Customer Review (What's this?) Great hardware enables LYNX to perform ! easy set up...THANKS CRUTCHFIELD Pros: REMOTE CONTROL provides, ease of use. Cons: NONE 3 out of 3 people found this helpful Was this review helpful? Yes No Hands-on research What's in the box? | In-depth notes What's in the box? Download owner's manual Lynx SiriusXM vehicle dock PowerConnect FM transmitter/cigarette lighter adapter (with attached 55" DC cord) Magnetic vehicle antenna (with attached 22.75' cord terminated by a single SMB connector) IR remote control CR2025 3V lithium battery Dash mount Vent mount (with 2 extended vent clamps) 51" Stereo minijack cable (with a right-angle male 3.5mm connector on each end) 4 Large machine screws 1 Small machine screw Rubber wedge 2 Alcohol prep pads Quick Start Guide (Eng) Quick Start Guide (Spa) Accessory Guide (Eng/Spa) FCC and SAR Statements "Welcome to Lynx" note Warranty Information InstallCard Product Research Features Dimensions Features Overview: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) allows you to connect the Lynx SiriusXM Portable Radio (220LYNX, sold separately) to your vehicle's in-dash head unit using Aux In, Bluetooth stereo streaming (A2DP), or the built-in PowerConnect FM transmitter. The Vehicle Kit (LV1) also includes a magnetic mount Satellite Radio antenna, IR remote control, and mounting hardware. SiriusXM Subscription/Activation: The SiriusXM Lynx Portable Radio supports SiriusXM programming with access to XM & Sirius Satellite Radio stations. You can receive more than 150 channels of exclusive programming directly from SiriusXM. The Lynx allows you to connect to SiriusXM Satellite Radio, SiriusXM Internet Radio, or both. Connecting to both services provides you with the complete experience, giving you access to all of the features Lynx has to offer. Note: Most of the channels are the same on the SiriusXM Satellite Radio and Internet Radio channel lineups, however, there are exclusive channels found on both the Satellite and Internet Radio services. The SiriusXM All Access package (subscription required) provides access to SiriusXM Satellite and Internet Radio. Other SiriusXM Packages also available. SiriusXM Dock Connector: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) is fitted with a proprietary SiriusXM Dock connector and is designed specifically for the Lynx SiriusXM Portable Radio for playback of SiriusXM Satellite and Internet Radio in your car, truck, or SUV. Rotary Knob: The vehicle dock features an integrated rotary knob that lets you browse and quickly tune to SiriusXM channels. Audio Connections: The vehicle dock has color-coded connectors to assist you in connecting the cables to the correct connector. The vehicle dock provides three connection options to transfer XM Satellite Radio audio to your vehicle's audio system PowerConnect FM Transmitter: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) comes supplied with a PowerConnect FM transmitter/cigarette lighter adapter which allows your Lynx Portable Radio to wirelessly transmit audio to your vehicle's in-dash head unit over and FM frequency. You can choose from any FM frequency between: 88.1 and 107.9 MHz. You can store up to 5 FM stations so you can quickly access the stations which give you the best audio reception when using the PowerConnect. The PowerConnect FM transmitter/cigarette lighter adapter simply plugs into the power port of the included vehicle dock and the cigarette lighter or 12-volt accessory port of your vehicle. The PowerConnect FM Transmitter also provides power to your docked Lynx Portable Radio. Auxiliary input: The vehicle dock has a minijack audio output (3.5mm) to connect the unit directly to your in-dash head unit's auxiliary input (if applicable), using the supplied stereo minijack cable. When using the line output jack, you can adjust the level to match your head unit's other sources. FM Direct (optional): The FM Direct Adaptor (607FMDA25, sold separately) connects directly in-line with your vehicle's existing AM/FM antenna input (motorola) and the vehicle dock's FM output (2.5mm). This optimizes the signal of the PowerConnect FM transmitter/cigarette lighter adapter's built-in FM modulator to your vehicle's radio, especially in regions with a high density of FM radio stations and few open FM channels. Bluetooth Audio Streaming: If your vehicle's in-dash head unit has Bluetooth stereo audio streaming (A2DP Profile) capability, you can connect the Lynx to your factory radio via Bluetooth (without the need for audio cables). You will still need to connect the Lynx to the vehicle dock, plug in the included SiriusXM antenna, and insert the PowerConnect FM transmitter to your vehicle's 12-volt accessory/cigarette lighter port. Note: The Lynx is not compatible with the Hands Free Profile (HFP). Magnetic Antenna: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) comes supplied with a magnetic antenna that is designed to be mount outside of the vehicle and placed on the roof of your vehicle. The magnetic antenna will adhere to your vehicle's sheet metal. The antenna features a 22.75' cable terminated by a SMB connector. Mounting Options: The mounting location of the vehicle dock should be easily accessible for controlling your docked Lynx Portable Radio and provide good visibility of the unit's display, and should not be located where it will be in direct sunlight, which will affect the visibility of the display screen. The Vehicle Kit (LV1) comes with two mounting options. Self-Adhesive Dash Mount: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) includes a self-adhesive plastic mount which allows you to place the unit on your vehicle's dash. The self-adhesive dash-mount allows you to swivel and adjust the unit for better visibility. Vent-Mount: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) also includes a plastic mount which allows to you to clip the unit onto one of your vehicle's dash vents. Note: When mounting the vehicle dock in your vehicle, choose a location where it will not block your vision, interfere with the controls, or obstruct the air bag. Optional Pro-Fit VSM: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) can also be mounted using an optional Pro.Fit Vehicle Specific Mount (item 042VSM) and the TS-01 adapter (item 042TS01). Please consult the Crutchfield Vehicle Selector to see if there is a Pro.Fit VSM to fit your vehicle. Remote Control: The Vehicle Kit (LV1) comes with an IR remote control for wireless operation of your docked SiriusXM Lynx Portable Radio. The remote operates off of a single CR2025 3V lithium 'coin-type' battery. Dimensions Vehicle Dock: Width = 4.4375" Height = 3.4375" Depth = 1.625" SiriusXM Antenna: Width = 1.375" Height = 0.5625" Depth = 1.75" Cable Length = 22.75' Remote Control: Width = 2.1875" Height = 0.4375" Depth = 4.1875" Our Product Research Team At Crutchfield, you'll get detailed, accurate information that's hard to find elsewhere. That's because we have our own in-house Product Research team. They verify what's in the box, check the owner's manual, and record dimensions, features and specs. We stay on top of new products and technologies to help people make informed choices. Sorry, the SiriusXM Lynx™ Car Kit is no longer available. Looking for a similar item? Shop all Car Kits Or, you can still... Write a review Purchase accessories for this product Download the product manual Search the website Go


text: For 25 years Camp Chef has elevated the outdoor cooking experience. We are continuing that tradition with the brand-new Camp Chef app. With instant access to a growing library of recipes, videos, and the Camp Chef Community, The Way to Cook Outdoors can go with you anywhere. Ca... Read More


text:
"I'd say this astonishing adaptation of Wuthering Heights was one of the most impressive costume dramas I've seen in years, except it's so far removed from any normal expectations of the genre that I'd hesitate to call it a costume drama at all." Robbie Collin, Daily Telegraph.
Based on the classic novel by Emily Bronte, a poor boy of unknown origins is rescued from poverty and taken in by the Earnshaw family where he develops an intense relationship with his young foster sister.
Unrated, 129 minutes


text:
And now for something really different: a licorice macaroon—réglisse in French—with a salted caramel filling. It's an example of how Ladurée thinks outside the pastry box. All photography courtesy Ladurée.
June 2009
Product Reviews / Main Nibbles / Cookies
Ladurée Macaron Recipe
Page 2: Ready To Bake!
This is Page 2 of a two-page article. Click on the black link below to visit Page 1.
Macaron Recipe
A baking supply shop or online supplier can sell you quality flavorings, and you know not to skimp by buying cheap almonds. But your challenge, if you want to do the macaron equivalent of a "World Pastry Cup" challenge, is to find (or make) great fillings and experiment with the truly great flavors.
Ladurée does not reveal many secrets in parting with this recipe. You'd need to get your hands on the same flavorings and fillings used there, and have the same deft hand at macaron-making as those gifted professionals. And, a large part of the skill is knowing what flavors of meringue to pair with what flavors of filling.
But of course you can come up with something faster, and far more reasonably priced, than a mac pilgrimage to Paris! Find the best artisan jams and collaborate with jam-making friends: They make huckleberry jam, you make huckleberry macarons, everyone has enough for two parties.
This recipe makes inch-wide mini macarons. If you want them larger, pipe a larger macaron onto the cookie sheet.
Fan favorites include Pistachio, Raspberry and Salted Butter Caramel. You may want to start out with Raspberry, as it's easy to find a good flavoring/coloring as well as good artisan raspberry jam. We're also including a recipe for a chocolate raspberry ganache below.
Recipe only originally published in the U.K.'s Daily Mail. Instructions revised by THE NIBBLE.
Chocolate Raspberry Ganache
1. MELT chocolate with cream in the top of a double boiler, stirring until smooth. If you don't have a double boiler, use a metal bowl set over a pot of barely simmering water. The bottom of the bowl should not touch the water.
2. WHEN the chocolate is melted into the cream, remove bowl from heat. Add the butter and raspberry extract, stirring until butter is melted.
3. LET STAND Lat room temperature until cooled completely and slightly thickened.
More Macarons & Macaroons
Recipe © Ladurée. All other material © Copyright 2005- 2015 Lifestyle Direct, Inc. All rights reserved. Images are copyright of their respective owners.
About Us
Contact Us
Privacy Policy
Media Center
Manufacturers & Retailers


text:
- Pabitra Mukhopadhyay
- Kolkata , West Bengal
- India
This conversation is closed.
Goodbye Mr. Darwin and the selfish gene?
Jaroslav Flegr, a self-described "sloppy dresser," the 53-year-old Czech scientist has the contemplative air of someone habitually lost in thought, and his still-youthful, square-jawed face is framed by frizzy red hair that encircles his head like a ring of fire. He is trying to change the way we think about Darwinian Evolution.
He suspected that Toxoplasma Gondii, an obligate, intracellular, parasitic protozoan that causes the disease toxoplasmosis, and with which he is infected is changing his behavior subtly so that his 'selfish' genes are more or less now slave to those of the genes of the parasite. If what he thinks is true, Jaroslav is under more the selective pressure of the parasite than his own genes.
For fact, parasites inducing behavioral changes in hosts have been reported by many scientists. Toxoplasmosis is one of the most prevalent infection among humans. If you have affinity for cats, you are likely infected.
Jaroslav has come up with the idea of frozen evolution, which suggests that new adaptations by accumulation of random mutations happen only when their members are genetically uniform, i.e., only after a portion of the population of the original species has split off, balanced on the edge of extinction for several generations, and then undergone rapid expansion. After a short period of time,polymorphism accumulates in the gene pool due to frequency-dependent selection; and thus, in each generation, new mutations occur in the presence of different alleles and therefore change their selection coefficients from generation to generation. The species ceases to behave in an evolutionarily plastic manner and exists in this state until such changes accumulate in the environment that the species becomes extinct.
When you are a host, it is unknown in which direction your evolutionary future lies – survival or extinction.
So is it goodbye to Mr. Darwin or his celebrity proponent Dr. Richard Dawkins?
Jimmy Strobl
Dec 18 2013: Darwin never said that genes we're selfish.
- +1
Dawkins on the other hand has a book with that title, and the title is often deeply misunderstood.
I'm sorry Pabitra, but as with everything else that people think disproves evolution this is rather a magnificent(ly scary) example OF evolution...
Dec 18 2013: Jimmy,
The debate actually does not challenge evolution but seeks to examine if it is time to question whether it follows a classical Darwinian philosophy. If frozen evolution hypothesis is established, the expressed phenotypes of an organism can no longer be credited to its genes rather, in a host-parasitic context parasite gene polymorphism takes control of the evolution.
One can argue that half of humanity is crazy or our cultural diversity is the result of a parasitic infestation. I just wanted to know if we are ready yet to accept that possibility.Dec 31 2013: Darwin did not propose the selfish gene hypothesis. the selfish gene is Dawkins'. Therefore, if the selfish gene hypothesis/metaphor was wrong, then it would be goodbye Dawkins, not goodbye Darwin.
But the whole thing with toxoplasmosis is so wrong that I would not know where to start. Do the toxoplasma's genes get benefit from controlling the host or not? Well, the fallacy is on looking at the hosts genes no longer being benefitted, while other genes are. This case was clearly explained ever as far long ago as Dawkins' book "the selfish gene" itself. It was further explained in "the extended phenotype."
Therefore if those are the words of Jaroslav Flegr, then Jaroslav has to learn to look more carefully what he/she is saying.
The problem with the second part [EDIT: frozen evolution] shows poor understanding of population genetics. Some people should really stay away from evolutionary biology, or consult with someone more embedded on the subject before opening their mouths, Of course, it could be that this person knows evolutionary theory and population genetics well, but makes these declarations to gain notoriety.
Jan 2 2014: "The problem with the second part shows poor understanding of population genetics. Some people should really stay away from evolutionary biology, or consult with someone more embedded on the subject before opening their mouths,"
What is the second part?
Who do you mean are 'some' people?
Why do you think these 'some' people should stay away from evolutionary biology?
Jaroslav Flegr is a noted evolutionary biologist himself. Here is his bio and work.
I think it is good and simple English and readable enough (papers under evolutionary parasitology) before coming to any quick assessment of his work and this debate.
Jan 4 2014: The second part is the frozen evolution part.
"Who do you mean are 'some' people?"
The guy you cite in the OP, for example.
"Why do you think these 'some' people should stay away from evolutionary biology?"
Because if they don't understand those concepts properly they can only come up with these unfounded ideas (like frozen evolution). The only effect they have is a lot of people misunderstanding evolutionary theories. for example, he's got you thinking that the selfish gene was an idea by Darwin, that a parasite controlling the host behaviour was a counter-examplke for the selfish gene (far from it), and that there's such a thing as "frozen evolution" which is but a mistaken way to look at population genetics.
The link you provided shows that this guy is first a parasitologist and then a molecular biologists specialized in parasites. Not an evolutionary biologist proper. It's right there in plain English. But I did not need to see that since what you wrote shows enough poor understanding of evolutionary theory in general and of the selfish gene hypothesis/metaphor in particular for me to notice that the ideas lacked a proper foundation. I explained. You don't have to believe me, of curse, but at the very least you should be able to verify, for example, if Darwin suggested anything like the selfish gene (hint: by Darwin's time genes had not been described). It should also be easy for you to notice that, since the parasite's genes are benefitted, the selfish gene stands. That claiming the opposite shows that this person looked the wrong way (the hosts' genes, rather than the parasite's genes) when he made his assessment.
See ya.
P.S. I did not come with a quick assessment. The assessment took me years and years of learning and education in evolutionary biology. From reading the books by Darwin, Dawkins, E.O. Wilson, Gould, etc, to specific courses and participation in research.
Jan 4 2014: Thank you for clarifying.
As far as I know and correct me if I am wrong, evolutionary biology, as a sub-field of biology has not emerged as an academic discipline in its own right until 1930 to 40.
" It was not until the 1970s and 1980s, however, that a significant number of universities had departments that specifically included the term evolutionary biology in their titles, often in conjunction with ecology and behavior. In the United States, as a result of the rapid growth of molecular and cell biology, many universities have split (or aggregated) their biology departments into molecular and cell biology-style departments and ecology and evolutionary biology-style departments" Wikipedia says that.
So I am not sure if any senior scientist will at all have a masters/bachelors on evolutionary biology. Flegr did MS on cytology - so I am not clear how you think he is first a parasitologist and then evolutionary biologist. His research activities clearly show work in the area of evolutionary biology.
I think we both can agree that we cannot be too technical about the science involved in this debate, but I do not think any part of my OP can lead one to think that I am thinking 'selfish gene' was Darwin's idea. It was a hypothesis by Richrad Dawkins that has gained popularity is scientific community.
Nor does 'Goodbye Mr. Darwin' mean Jaroslav's hypothesis of 'frozen plasticity' is anti-Darwinian in essence just like special relativity was not anti-Newtonian. Science simply does not work that way.
Flegr's work seeks to provide ways to explain adaptive traits in sexual reproduction of species, which Darwin could not very successfully do nor did Richard Dawkins.
What do you think are the gene's of the host? Altruistic genes? Did Dawkins hypothize 'selfishness' of genes only for the parasites? Also it may be very interesting to note that the parasitic genes freely proliferate through sexual reproduction.Jan 4 2014: Hi Pabitra,
This guy is first a parasitologist because that's what his main publications are about. Even several of those he labels as "evolutionary biology." His education clearly did not include the necessarily harsh discussion on evolutionary biology. I gave you a few examples that betray his lack of proper training.
Reading through this guy's publications I gather a sense that this guy is talking inside an echo chamber. He is lacking a key need in scientific research, the voice of dissent within his own research group and collaborative network. This way he would have avoided some all-too-obvious mistakes. For example, I read the guy saying that sexual reproduction would work against natural selection. Yet, for example, some experiments on directed evolution show that recombination of selected variants can speed up evolutionary changes by orders of magnitude. The same is true in simulations. And that was just the first few paragraphs of his introduction. By the way, Darwin did not have any problems explaining evolution in sexual organisms at all. All his data was on sexually reproducing organisms to begin with. Sure, later on scientists started wondering about problems with sexual reproduction and evolution, but the problems were more about the risks of sexual reproduction, such as mate displays that make organisms easier targets of predation, not about the advantage of recombination. So, this guy has a lot of things quite wrong.
As per the "goodbye Mr Darwin," the obvious effect is to mislead people into thinking that the whole of evolution is wrong. That's what "goodbye" entails, while Darwin represents the whole of evolution in the minds of most of the public.
The selfish gene is about the unit of selection. Dawkins proposed genes as such. If some genes enslave other organism's genes makes no difference. Selfish genes still in effect. As I said, Dawkins explained this in his books. (There's more, but the books explains better than I could here.)
I'm out.Dec 27 2013: The selfish gene is nothing but the need . The need of an individual & at the stage where it requires to mutilate, to achieve is the stage were not only the individual but the full society feel it that wayDec 27 2013: Hi Pabitra,
A couple of observations: Biology is dynamic by definition and has a non-cyclic aspect to it as reflected in biological evolution.
The concept of the niche is fundamental to what makes biology a science. No two separate species can occupy the same niche at the same location indefinitely. It's obvious that niches have expanded during the history of life on earth. Many of these expanding niches have come about dependent on other living organisms and as their populations expanded opportunites for new species in the form of viruses, mistletoe, etc., were added to the phylogenic tree.
If I understand correctly Jaroslav Flegr is delving into some interesting potential consequences of how this host parasite relationship could influence the hosts in ways that could influence or interfere with the basic mechanism (genes) that enable the biological evolutionary process. I presume this influence would have only come about after the niche was invaded by a species. It's hard for me to think this would alter the basic concept and theory of biological evolution, but rather help define its evolving subtlies.
It would not surprise me that Professor Flegr is onto something. Perhaps a future TED Speaker with an idea worth spreading. I am looking forward to reading what he has to say.
I'm on cold medication so I hope I'm making sense.
Dec 28 2013: The problem, Dan, with the idea of biological niche is that of a scale. As we look at the ecology, which is biology expressed in grand scale, niche is obvious. If we look at genetics, which is biology expressed in the minutest of scale know to us, the boundaries defining niches start to become blurry.
It is time we start defining the unit of life. To me it seems to be an organism having an independent life with a copy mechanism to reproduce and having a given life span and evolving in a given environment. To me it also seems that the idea of biological independence is rather contrived, the copy mechanism of reproduction is all but accurate and the environment is easily exchangeable with other species.
Dec 28 2013: Pabitra, I must admit I can't connect where you are coming from with your explainations, nor Flegr's postulate.
Richard Dawkin's with his observation of memes (a word he coined) was able to explain how the affects of our human genetic constitution is not the sole influence of our life circumstances. We can, and have, independently influenced our niche and overall survival success by our behavior and cultural knowledge. Interestingly enough in some cases by negating the negative consequences of individual genetic phenotypic expression via medicine, and also in so many other ways via communication, inventiveness, and on and on.
As already pointed out Flegr's claim seems more likely to be the consequence of the blind unfolding evolution of the living biosphere of which we are part, including serving as a niche for numerous other living organisms. These consequences may well often be esoteric, cumulative, selective, beneficial, detrimental, etc.
I don't see a case here for his postulate.
Dec 29 2013: What do you think is the biological niche of T. Gondii? It has two aspects of its existence/life, one sexual that happens only within the stomachs of cats and another asexual part that can can happen inside the bodies of almost all warm blooded animals. Flegr's postulate in one part cites its strange life where T. Gondii arguably influence the non-cat hosts' brain functions subtly (Flegr himself is a host) so that the host organism's biological goal is compromised against the parasite's. Looked from T.Gondii's perspective it doesn't seem to have a niche, or if it does have one it is too complex and huge for its size.Dec 29 2013: Hi Pabitra, in response to the concept of a biological niche.
T. Gondii may have two physically independent aspects of its life cycle, but they are not independent of one another. The niche of this species like all other species of life would include all the physical needs necessary which enable it to survive as a species. The essential niche of this organism is in the belly of it host, but from there it is able to roam to intermediate hosts.
This is my understanding of basic biology and it is an important concept because it is a fundamental component to understanding evolution. I don't see how better understanding T. Gondii via Jaroslav Flegr publications contradicts how evolution in known to work as originally postulated by Charles Darwin and beautifully explored by Richard Dawkins.
Dec 29 2013: Dan, Pabritra,
As I read your posts I thought of how certain creatures gather in a certain location to reproduce and are abele to roam far from said location ... in the case you are talking about its the belly of one creature and the bodies of other creatures... in the one I was thinking about its a certain bay rather than the arctic waters ... and as I write this I consider how it could even be a certain river source vs the open seas ... or certain beaches vs the open seas.... or certain islands vs the vast territories they normally roam most of their lives... In other words the idea of reproducing in a particular place while living elsewhere most of their lives is rather common... there are even certain bugs that live under the ground most of their lives and come out to reproduce at a particular stage... In the case of your conversation it seems the creature likes to reproduce in the stomach of cats and live elsewhere... I wonder if it develop and subtlety influences hosts behaviors so as to induce them to live together in order to facilitate it's own existence... or if it just took advantage of the particular niche that the hosts created by living together... in a more civilized context ... to companies form where there is a workforce and favorable conditions or does the workforce live and the favorable conditions be created where companies form?Dec 30 2013: Hi Esteban,
One of the key aspects of the natural evolution of species is that it is blind as opposed to designed. The selective pressures and opportunist influences is what directs change in a given population expression by favoring variation within individual offspring members of the population, or favoring chance changes in the individual genes passed on to the offspring. Also a niche is characterized by a range and often reflected in the population of a species. The Douglas fir tree tends to be more magnificent in the center of its range in the Pacific Northwest than on the outer limits of that range. In other words these individuals tend to be more fit.
Dec 30 2013: Dan,
When one species develops the capability of molding it's surroundings to expand and accommodate the rage over which it prospers the natural evolution can come into the influence of that one species whims and become designed and guided evolution... akin to breeding of dogs for particular traits... or 'genetically' modified plants/animals/environments. If we consider memetic influences into the human development evolution we may even observe more complicated relationships... do ideas tend to our needs or do we tend to the needs of ideas? Maybe its a bit more complicated as we tend to each-other wellbeing... the gardener-plant caring for each other breathing in and breathing out in a synergistic cycle thanks to the collaboration with the other...Dec 21 2013: This talk appears to be strikingly relevant
Dec 21 2013: Yes it is Arkady. There is marked similarity between biological realm and cultural, the later grows, spreads, infects, develops immunity or gets perished almost like biological entities. There is a great insight here that we may seek to examine.
Just like biosphere comes under periodical waxing and waning of parasitic, germ based influences globally that we may choose to call pandemic, the thought-o-sphere experiences the same incidence. Why and how exactly that happens is an intriguing question but you may like to just shift through the TED conversations of the past month and so to check how many of those involves memes like 'virus', 'evolution', 'survival', 'spread'.
You will be amazed.
When I showed that to my wife she said, are you sure these people do not conspire together?
Dec 21 2013: I like Dennett's talks not as much for what he says as much for what he implies. This talk has thoughts intersecting with your thesis on more levels than just meet the eye. First, he starts with an example from biology where a parasite changes behavior of an intermediate host to get to the host of its preference. This example is, essentially, the same as your example with toxoplasmosis.
His talk also intersects with what I said below regarding the role of non-material things, such as ideas and will in biological evolution. Dennett says in his talk:
"The secret of happiness is: Find something more important than you are and dedicate your life to it. Most of us -- now that the "Me Decade" is well in the past -- now we actually do this. One set of ideas or another have simply replaced our biological imperatives in our own lives. This is what our summum bonum is. It's not maximizing the number of grandchildren we have. Now, this is a profound biological effect. It's the subordination of genetic interest to other interests. And no other species does anything at all like it."
Well, I wouldn't be so sure about other species. There are known examples when a dog risks its life to save another dog or its master, for example. This behavior cannot be explained by the desire to maximize the number of grandchildren.
Dec 21 2013: I too like Dennett's talks because they try to demystify consciousness. One of his focus areas is explaining consciousness based on biology.
I think the twist in the tale is that untimely its biology but not exactly the way Darwinist's think. The selfish gene idea gave us a way to see what exactly is a unit of life. With parasites the boundaries become hazy. If one thinks about the genetic units of one's own ruling the things, well, humans are loaded with foreign units that are essential for its living, aren't they. I may not live at all if I am stripped of every single piece of non-human genetic material from my physiology. They are part of me and they determine how I live. It doesn't have to be parasites. Our alimentary systems are practically run by bacteria. Even mitochondria, our cells' battery used to be an independent organism once.
With so much of biology involved, who is maximizing his grandchildren through us is a big question it seems.Dec 21 2013: Here is another Dennett's talk which I have in my favorites
I love it for the way he delivers his message. In the beginning he compares consciousness to street magic. When it's explained, people get disappointed because the magic disappears. Then he proceeds to explain how consciousness works, showing on a few simple examples that we see what we expect to see whereas the actual reality is something completely different.
The funniest part of the talk is the comments. Many people are either disappointed or frustrated that Dennett didn't explain anything. Well, he did. That's exactly what he said - that reality is not what we expect it to be. And, in a twisted way, it applies to his presentation itself. People who are disappointed with his presentation simply don't get the point. The explanation of consciousness is not what we would expect.
In a similar way, scientists would think that species are driven by the desire to perpetuate their genes. Whereas, the examples of mice infected with toxoplasmosis or the ant climbing up the grass blade, they appear to promote someone else's genes.
And why do we have to promote any genes at all? Where does this desire come from? What's wrong with Mars and other planets without life?Dec 19 2013: can you be more precise on the parasite you have in mind? Because if parasite should take over out system is more or less we are infected with a disease.
If i'm wrong pls pull me back on the track.
Dec 20 2013: I am talking about a sngle celled protozoan named Toxoplasma Gondii. That it does not produce noticeable illness (except for pregnant women - babies may die) is something scary. Please read this link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/05/toxoplasma-gondii-brain-parasite-suicide-cats_n_1651523.htmlDec 19 2013: Pabitra,
I wanted to thank you for another perplexing problem. I will add it to my collection. I downloaded Flegr's book and will read it when I have time. It has valuable insight not only on evolution and biology, but on science in general.
This question seems to belong to a huge class of paradoxes connected with Russell's paradox http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/. The paradox considers sets which do not contain themselves. If we consider a set of all such sets, we come to a contradiction when we try to decide whether such set contains itself. The "Barber's paradox" is of the same nature. Most paradoxes dealing with omnipotence and omniscience are of the same nature. The controversy of whether a fetus is a part of mother's body or a separate legal entity is another example. Controversies around "common good" vs. "individual good" seem to belong to the same category. "Where did the universe come from?" - another example. They are impossible to answer by logic.
Is the parasite a part of our body or a part of the environment? But, even deeper than that, is our own body a part of its own environment? The answer seems to be "yes". Then, the distinction between the body and environment seems to disappear. Perhaps, this distinction makes sense in some contexts, but not in others.
So, without going into details, it seems to me that your question does not have an answer. But, as usual, it's a great pleasure to think about it - just to realize how limited is our language and ability to understand things and "dissolve" these limits of our understanding (another paradox).
Dec 20 2013: Arkady,
Paradoxes are beacons standing on their heads trying to attract our attention towards the way we reason.Dec 20 2013: Arkady,
Rather than get entwined into a paradoxical self-negating stand I prefer to follow a simpler way.
The statement "there are no absolute truths" creates a paradox
The statement "there are absolute truths" doesn't create a paradox
Notice the self-validating point in the last statement.
i find curious how relativists resort to absolutes rather than simply resort to relatives... To me an absolutists can always be both an absolutists and a relativists at the same time by choice (which sort of makes the distinction between being a relativists and an absolutists quite irrelevant). Note that the relativists can only accomplish such a feat in the particular case when what they had chosen as a relative truth happens to correspond to the absolute truth... Personally I rather take the stand where I can always be both rather than the stand where I can only be both in one particular case. The stand where what be be what be is much simpler than the stand where what isn't is what is and what is is and what isn't. Sure one could work in either one so long one kept track of the appropriate distinctions its just much simpler to work in a singularity where one win-or-wins than a confusing duality where one loses when one wins and wins when one loses (and ends up always loosing).
As you said "Perhaps, this distinction makes sense in some contexts, but not in others". Careful with the ways we reason... it may be dew to the 'subtle influences of parasites' (biological ideological and others).
Dec 20 2013: According to this article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-refuting_idea, self-refuting ideas can be of two types: a self-consistent tautology (e.g. "this statement is true") or a self-contradiction (e.g. "this statement is false"). "This statement is true" is true or false, depending on what you believe about it. If you believe, it's true, it is so. If you believe it's false, it also confirms that belief without contradiction. It's interesting to observe that this self-consistency is absolute.
"This statement is false", on the other hand, contradicts itself. As we go through logical steps trying to find out if it's true or false, it switches from true to false in every step: "if it's true, then it's false, then it's true, etc." In digital circuits, an equivalent of such statement is called a "ring oscillator" - a circuit that picks up noise and starts oscillating between logical high and low.
Statements relative to ourselves are absolute. Your right hand is always on your right side, no matter where you face. The right hand of another person is also on your right if you face the same direction. But if you stand against each other, the other person's right hand will be on your left. This is how it is with moral statements. They are absolute for a given person and same for people with common interests, but turn into opposites when two people oppose each other. So, yes, things can be absolute and relative at the same time. Absolutism is relative (things can be absolute in certain contexts) and relativism is absolute ("everything is relative" or "nothing can be absolute in all contexts").
It's a convoluted subject. The wikipedia article gives a good, although incomplete, overview of the issues involved. There is no way to coherently explain this issue because language is logical, and this issue deals with the limits of logic. But it's possible to understand this issue enough to recognize questions without answers.
Dec 20 2013: Arkady,
I like what you said about " It's interesting to observe that this self-consistency is absolute".
"This statement is true" is true or false, depending on whether the statement happens to be true or false... what one believes about it takes us to a whole different domain... In a way one stand can give each what they want while still giving them the same thing. Take the sustainable-desirable-congruent with life ways, it gives each what they want while still giving them the same thing (sustainable-desirable-congruent with life ways). Ending up in a place with only good; on the one hand is a reward to those who desire good and and on he other hand its a punishment for those who desire bad. Likewise 'may God give you abundantly of what you desire' can be a blessing or a curse!
As you pointed certain ways lead into an oscillating back and forth rather than into a definitive position. BTW moral statements are absolute... those who say that good is bad and bad is good find it bad ... In other words it turns into opposite by those who oppose the good. I am glad that you conceded to the fact that things can be absolute and relative at the same time. I do see that you then when into the convoluted subject of 'Absolutism is relative and relativism is absolute' rather than into the straightforward notion where 'Absolutism is absolute and relativism is relative'...
There be ways to coherently explain these issues using language and logic, independent of the fact that this issue may deals with the limits of logic, but even-though it's possible to understand this issue some choose to think its impossible and choose not to do what be required to understand it... sort of creating a self fulfilling self-consistent prophecy... in a way its a bit 'esoteric' those who know know and needn't be told and those who don't know while they may be told will not understand it... they could get it, they just choose not to get it...:-)Dec 21 2013: What makes sense doesn't require an explanation.
Dec 21 2013: Often I read someone state "that doesn't make sense" when the truth of the matter be "someone can't make sense of that" while "somebody can make sense of that" ... in other words what be be what be and weather some individual can make sense of it or not is a whole different matter... Often individuals project their notions and thoughts unto reality and then claim reality is as they think and conceive it... when the truth of the matter be that what be be what be... and what one thinks of it be what one thinks of it ... sometimes there being a correspondence between what one thinks to be and what happens to be... I would rather stay away from getting too deep into this conversational rabbits hole... I am sure you and others can do a wonderful job... I was sort of drawn into this because of the mention of paradox and the work I have done related to transcending dualistic notions... keep in mind that when someone who is wrong tells somebody who is right that "somebody is wrong" they are somewhat validating that someone is wrong and somebody is right. If someone who is wrong where to say "somebody is right" we would have to figure out if its because someone recognized what is right or because somebody is wrong... as you mentioned previously 'It's a convoluted subject'. I like to say that one can twists the twisted straight ... of course if one makes just the appropriate and specific twists required... as I just said a couple of sentences back " I am sure you and others can do a wonderful job..." I hope that you and others actually do a wonderful job!Dec 21 2013: Arkady, the philosophical contemplation as to whether or not a parasite is part of us is of not much practical relevance if as a result of this parasite invading your body, you are getting sick.
Dec 21 2013: Provided always how you define sickness (the semantical scope of the word included). When a virus gets to someone's brain, live their merrily without making one ill (meaning no obvious reason for a medical treatment) and subtly influences one's behaviors like dress sense, personality and mental capabilities, one borders on the doubtful boundary between sickness and health.
I never know whether the cat loving driver running the bus I am in is Toxo positive but it can make the difference between life and death of a lot of people.
Dec 21 2013: Pabitra, in general you don't know anything at all about your bus driver. He could as well be a lunatic, alcoholic or whatever else one could dream up, without being toxo positive.Dec 21 2013: Note that the parasite does not harm you. It causes you to harm yourself. The philosophical question is whether we can willfully resist this influence of the parasite or are we doomed to do what the parasite causes us to do. How much can we resist the influence of the environment?
Dec 21 2013: Consider that 'the parasite' may be biological, ideological , sociological and even energetically in form (and a couple of other alternatives)... to what extent the host is responsible for what they do under the influence of such stuff? the notion that the parasite does not harm you while it does causes you to choose to harm yourself could involve a bit of play of words... Who is responsible for 'the seduction': the seduced, the seducer, the circumstances around the event,the spirit of seduction that possessed each of the previous stakeholders? Does acting under the influence of... being possessed take away the individual responsibility? As you mention "The philosophical question is whether we can willfully resist this influence of the parasite or are we doomed to do what the parasite causes us to do. How much can we resist the influence of the environment"?
To what extent does the parasite actually not harm you? To what extent does the parasite seduce you to harm yourself?Dec 21 2013: It depends what you consider "harm". If the parasite changes something in my neural structure, then I would consider that very much a harm.
The parasite doesn't cause, for example, schizophrenia, but changes something in the brain that eventually can lead to schizophrenia (and other problems).
Not sure how you would be able to resist whatever the parasite causes, but if as a result you get schizophrenia you can get treatment for that.
Resisting also seems difficult because in order to resist you first need to know that you got an infection, which most likely isn't the case.Dec 21 2013: We have many parasites in our body without which we cannot survive, such as acidophilus bacteria. They also affect our digestion and neural system. Why do you think, it's "your" neural structure, anyway? Aren't you just an "environment" for the parasite, it's "habitat"? Why can we change our own habitat for our own benefit, but when a parasite does so, we consider it "harmful"? Aren't humans often acting as parasites in the ecosystem of the Earth?
I don't expect answers to these questions. I'm just offering a perspective.
Dec 21 2013: We have a lot of micro organisms in and on our body but not parasites. Those are different.
Btw, L. Acidophilus is not a parasite. A parasite is any organism living on/in its host and deriving nutrients at the host's expense.
In any case, I don't enjoy parasites using my body as their playground. Do you ?Dec 19 2013: Very good discussion going on....
My thoughts are , what Jaroslav is saying is rather stregthening Darwin's proposition about "VARIATION".
Well the differences are in how "VARIATION" happens , if I have understood the discussion here well.
What Gerald is considering is that Parasites are part of environment from which actually the selective pressure for mutation coming in, but I feel Pabitra that is where differences of opinion are coming from.
Like Gerald in my thoughts also , I consider parasites to be part of environment.
Whether something is disease or not as pointed out by Herald, can be another subject for long debate. This something like what is NORMAL mental condition and what is not which sometime back I came across while studying depressive conditions or Schizophrenia. Hallucination or delusion someone with specific mental condition goes through are REAL experiences to them , which is unreal to all other who are wit so called stable Mental Condition.
Molecular genetics was not that developed at the time of Darwin, moreover Genetics & Theory of Evolution didn't converge together that well during Darwins time. Darwin rather drew a very much "Helicopter View" on the process of changes happening in nature.
So my understanding is that with the evidences of parasitic influence on mutation is rather strengthening Darwins proposition of VARIATION , STRUGGLE For Existence " Survival of the Fittest" as well as Natural Selection.
Thanks Pabitra for bringing a thought provocative discussion.
Dec 19 2013: I cede to Gerald and you in accepting that yes parasites are also part of the environment of the host, because unless that is not the case the parasite host relationship will not develop at the first place. Well may be I should call it habitat or favorable environment?
This is exactly the heart of the debate. Whose genetic expressions we are in the end? Our own or the parasite that infests us?
Allorecognition and rejection of non-self part play an important role in maintaining genetic homogeneity throughout the life of an individual organism by preventing invasion of genetically different foreign entities that might parasitize the organism. What baffles me is that how come the parasites evolve to get past allorecognition of the host in as much as fooling its immune system whereas the hosts always lag in evolutionary terms not be clever enough to save themselves. They both are in the same environment, aren't they?
Dec 19 2013: Pabitrada , I am not sure from where Gerald came in, the point from where I am coming is....... here I was considering the cell itself where the gene is lying as it's macro environment. The parasite influencing the gene is also living in the same macro environment of the cell. From that sense it's part of environment of that gene. But for the host as a whole that becomes part of it physiological of biochemical environment.
Other than the parasite host relationship , in the biological kingdom there are also other relations which you are aware of i.e. symbiotic relationship or commensalic relationship and those also I feel part of the micro environment.....something like a tiger is part of the environment for a deer in the macro environment of a forest. In food chain Deer & Tiger has a predator prey relationship which is analogous to host and parasitic / symbiotic / commensalic realtion.
Dec 19 2013: Interesting point made Salim, thank you. I was mentioning environment as more macro term than the cellular environment of the host body. In fact I recognize parasites as independent genetic entities from the hosts which by nature require a host's body to live and complete its life cycle.
Moreover, symbiosis or commensalism is fundamentally different in terms of biological goals of organism from parasitism as parasites benefit at cost of host's harm. Allowing harm of an organism without developing a evolutionary antidote seems to be a weak argument for evolution itself. Flegr's hypothesis attempts to explain this as frozen plasticity of evolution as far as the host is concerned.Dec 19 2013: Welcome Pabitrada and you are right that parasites are independent genetic entities from the host as it is for Tiger Vs Deer. In the totality of ecosystem of forest they again becomes part of environment.
You definitely are aware that there are some viruses which displays basic features of life when those are in host body , if outside those are like non living things. Those viruses are considered to be the junction between living and non living world.
Grasping concept of evolution seems to be easier when one goes into micro level look into the simpler form of life. More complex the species becomes more difficult it is to grasp evolutionary process at least to me.
If I bring more analogy from physical world and focus on radio active matters the process of change from one matter to another becomes easier to understand. Same applies to biological world.
I need to read about Frozen Plasticity and Flegrs hypothesis to understand this new concept. Thanks for your reference.
Have a good dayDec 19 2013: Dawkins must adapt or go extinct.
Dec 19 2013: :) I think professor Dawkins will love that!
Dec 19 2013: He might love the idea, but I'm not sure how much he loves to adapt his views. He seems to be pretty frozen in some of his convictions. People frequently love ideas until they realize that these ideas apply to themselves. :-)Dec 18 2013: " its genetic code is homogeneous" -> what does that mean? Please... in you own words.
"If our behavior is subtly changed under the influence of parasites taking over our neuronic pathways, we are nor not really changing under natural selective pressure."
--> Yes we are,,, it's just that parasites have to be taken into acount as part of the environment. That's no news...
Dec 18 2013: I am not sure what exactly you mean by 'your own words'. These are my own words.I just have to hope that you understand genetic homogeneity and heterogeneity.
When a parasite is highjacking an organism's neuronic path ways in as much as inhibiting it's natural evolutionary instinct of saving its own genes it is acting against its natural selection in a fundamental way. A Toxoplasma Gondii infected male rat finds the smell of cat urine (cat pheromone) sexually attractive, by that the parasite is increasing the possibility of the rat ending in the belly of a cat where the parasite can sexually reproduce and complete its life cycle. The parasite is neither part of its favorable environment which we may consider its habitat nor the infected rat's behavior is a phenotype of the rat's genes. It is news.
Dec 18 2013: I think Gerald was mainly asking for an additional explanation that would be easier to follow for those not in the field.
I think your example here helps.Dec 18 2013: Not it isn't news. What the selfish gene says is that selection happens at the level of the gene, not the individual or group or species (unless it benefits the gene). Who cares of one's "evolutionary instincts" (whatever that means) ? Either the gene causes the environment to replicate it, or it doesn't.
"nor the infected rat's behavior is a phenotype of the rat's genes"
It isn't, because it doesnt count on getting toxoplasmosis or getting run over by a truck to get its genes down a generation.
Dec 19 2013: Well Gerald, I guess you are better informed then :)
To me, and I think to a lot it is news. The more I think about it it appears to be so plausible and it never struck me as a possibility.
Parasites abound in nature - their ways were not studied that much so that a parasitic genetic polymorphism can be seen as the more general case of evolution rather than genetic mutation and adaptations under natural selection pressure. It may explain many strange extinctions in the past and possibly many unlikely selection of a species over a more (apparently) likely one.Dec 18 2013: "The parasite is not part of its favorable environment which we may consider its habitat"
Obviously it is, or that environment wouldn't allow it to reproduce.Dec 18 2013: I don't understand this theory, Pabrita. Do you? If so, would you kindly explain it using your own words?
Dec 18 2013: Well, as far as I understand the theory suggests this (forgive me it is over simplified).
The gradual and continuous evolution of an organism through genetic mutations under the selective pressure of the environment as thought by Darwin is not the actual case. When speciation takes place and a new organism splits from its ancestor, its genetic code is homogeneous and it is only at that time the organism goes through rapid evolutionary changes through adaptations. Soon enough the genetic code develops different 'morphs' and the same organism starts exhibiting different traits. Enough scientific evidence that parasite gene polymorphism or parasite-selected mutations in the host can lead to a situation when the host organism's evolutionary plasticity is lost. The host organism then becomes extinct under changing environment.
If our behavior is subtly changed under the influence of parasites taking over our neuronic pathways, we are nor not really changing under natural selective pressure.
Dec 19 2013: Hi Pabitra.....what parasite do you have in mind ?
If a parasite takes over your neural pathways then I'd call that a disease but has nothing to do with natural selection beyond the possibility that if you die from it nature removed you from the gene pool.
Do you think that parasites highjacking neural pathways is something very common ?
Dec 19 2013: Harald, yes I think parasites highjacking neural pathways is way too common, certianly more common that we care to think.
After I read Flegr's hypothesis and about the current research on parasite induced behavioral change, I am not really sure about if I can categorize it as 'disease'. I mean if results show that almost half of human beings can be Toxo-positive and it otherwise does not show in any way like fever, pain or medical conditions to be worried about, but just change our behavior very subtly making us more risk prone, reclusive and forgetful, overtly social for females all because the parasite manipulates us in large populations to facilitate its own survival - I think it is more than disease.
Scary thing is, Toxo is just one parasite presently under popular microscope. There are truckloads of these in our bodies. Research indicates that during certain kinds of influenza, people become excessively social and outgoing because the virus needs to be spread through sprays of body fluids through sneezing.
Do you think schizophrenia is a disease? Toxo infested population have a clear connection with schizophrenia. For example Toxo has a gene that encourages release of dopamine in situation normally an organism is expected not to, the consequences are easy to imagine.
When the parasites have such access into our systems and such subtle control over our behaviors, it is hard to think about evolution taking place in a linear and gradual way with any level of predictability.Dec 19 2013: Pabrita, while it seems to be true that a high percentage (a read 1/3 of the population) might be infected with toxoplasmosis, only very view actually develop any symptoms. Those that do are mostly people with a compromised immune system and pregnant women. Actually, I remember that for decades pregnant women are advised to stay away from cats because of that.
I read about the possible subtle influence the parasite can have on our behavior, however, something like increased risk taking or higher probability for car accidents seems difficult to validate in my opinion, so I'm rather doubtful about those claims. For example, how do you know that if a person exhibits schizophrenia it is caused by toxoplasmosis ? Unless you run a study comparing the same person with and without the parasite, you can't know whether or not it is the real cause.
Schizophrenia certainly is a disease, It's a mental disorder and can be found as such in the DSM-V.
Dec 20 2013: E. Fuller Torrey of the Stanley Medical Research Institute in Bethesda, Maryland his colleagues noted a link between Toxoplasma and schizophrenia. Twelve of 44 schizophrenia patients who underwent MRI scans, a team scientists under Jiri Horacek of Charles University noted, had reduced gray matter in the brain—and the decrease occurred almost exclusively in those who tested positive for T. gondii. You can check their work.
For a more popular reading:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/05/toxoplasma-gondii-brain-parasite-suicide-cats_n_1651523.htmlDec 20 2013: Pabrita, 12 out of 44 had reduced grey matter. This means, 32 that also had schizophrenia neither had a reduction in grey matter nor did they have a T. gondii infection.
First the sample size is terribly small to be of much value. Secondly, more people without T. gondii had schizophrenia.
Frankly, how can one conclude based on this information that schizophrenia is related to a T. gondiii infection ?
Dec 21 2013: In a controlled test environment with carefully chosen subjects, I am afraid this is a good sample size.
Why not read Torry's own paper?
And some other works:
Actually there is a limit in this platform as to what extent one can go technical.Dec 21 2013: Pabitra, none of those links provides details about the methodology,
In any case, if infections with toxoplasmosis are so prevalent (at least 30 % of the population) it's virtually impossible not to find people that have toxoplasmosis AND some mental issue.
The question is how do you establish causality ? In other words how does one know that toxoplasmosis was the cause for the mental issue
Dec 22 2013: Well the surest way is to have a test for T.Gondii, it may be available in few countries. Jaroslav himself got himself checked and tested positive.
It is a problem to determine how much the parasite is controlling the brain, but please note that the debate is about how much not anymore about whether. Schizophrenia can be caused for various reasons, not all very well known, T. Gondii adds to the list.
I am sure with research the causality will be established, if not the idea will be scrapped. When I read your responses, I notice nothing unusual actually. Not even scientists like the idea that a single cell protozoan can take control of one's mind and behavior in a subtle way. But Flegr's work, unfortunately, indicates towards that direction.
Flegr is working on this for many years. When asked why his idea didn't become mainstream sooner, he says that its because he is not very outgoing, a recluse really, and he is not so proficient in English - those may be the reasons.Dec 24 2013: Pabrita, since we cannot run human trials we can't establish causality in the case of Toxoplasmosis being responsible for schizophrenia, especially with such small sample sizes of the population.
This whole story reminds of the Wakefield scam where he claimed that the MMR vaccine was responsible for autism. This claim was eventually disproved. Wakefileld either disseminated false data on purpose or he fell victim to the causality fallacy assuming that because the appearance of autism coincided with the vaccination the vaccination must be the culprit.
This Toxoplasmosis story sounds very similar to the MMR story.