Re: After a hard weeks work.

[M]adman wrote, On 06/04/09 06:48 AM:
Chris wrote:
On Apr 5, 10:13 pm, "[M]adman"<g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
rokim...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On Apr 5, 11:01 am, "[M]adman"<g...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
rokim...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On Apr 5, 5:19 am, Chris<chris.linthomp...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 4, 10:08 pm, rokim...@xxxxxxx wrote:

On Apr 4, 3:32 pm, Chris<chris.linthomp...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Apr 4, 4:17 pm, rokim...@xxxxxxx wrote:

On Apr 3, 10:25 am, spintronic<spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Nothing gives me greater pleaasure than going through "Ye Old
Ones" posts
and giving them all 1 star.

And If I have the energy. I'll give lenny a few unistars too.

Then I crack open a bud, and enjoy the weekend. ;-)

Ahhhh. Life is good.

You have to wonder about the fact of all the bogus and
dishonest people that abuse the system whether the Google
rating means much at all. Can any honest interpretation come
out of the noise? Guys like spinny would have to be in the
minority, but what fraction would they have to be to screw
the whole system? In my line of work we find that as little
as 5% incorrect data can mess up the statistical significance
of certain data sets. The reasons being that we are already
fighting things like uncontrolable factors like environmental
effects that affect the reproducibility of the phenotypes and
a few mess ups in your pedigree or sample mix ups can drop a
result from significant to can't tell. Since Google ratings
are pretty arbitrary already it may not take a whole lot of
boobs to mess things up.

Ron Okimoto

Ron-

Can I please ask your line of work? (I know you're a
geneticist.) Do you have some recent publications that are
available online?

Chris-

I've worked in chicken genomics since 1993. I have been
currently employed in the biotech department of a poultry
breeding company since 2005.

PubMed search "Okimoto R" Will bring up most of my publications
except for the plant papers. My graduate work was with
nematodes. I have been working as a researcher in molecular
biology labs since 1978. There are other Okimoto R authors, but
my publications involve plants, invertebrates and birds, and not
humans or medical research.

My PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Science) papers
and Genetics (the journal) papers are free and open access. The
more recent Poultry Science papers may be open access.

Ron Okimoto

Thanks. That sounds pretty interesting. I bet this isn't the
thrust of your research, but do chickens get nematode infections?

Chris-

Under modern breeding practices modern broilers and layers hardly
ever come in contact with parasites like nematodes. They are still
affected by microbial parasites like protozoans and bacteria. We
just can't seem to keep them out of the growing houses. "Free
Range" chickens are a different matter and one of the problems
with growing chickens outdoors is that they are exposed to
parasites such as nematodes. It is a strange deal, where you
think that you are doing the birds a favor by letting them have
more room and exposure to the outdoors, but they get eaten by
predators, and exposed to more diseases. For layer chickens the
egg production actually goes down and mortality goes up. There
seems to be more stress and agression if you give the chickens
more room and a lot of birds end up at the bottom of the pecking
order. For some reason having birds in less space and in smaller
groups reduces this problem.

I know of no nematode parasites such as the cause of trichinosis
in pork where nematodes can invade the muscle tissue of the pig
and infect humans that eat the undercooked meat. As far as I know
the common avian nematodes do not infect humans. We have 300
million years of divergent evolution to thank for that. We might
not have that Biblical prohibition against eating pork if pigs
(only areound 80 million years divergence) really were a
specially created kind.;-)

Ron Okimoto

The biblically illiterate

The food laws were for health benefits.

Unless you like that heart attack with your pork sausage sandwich
derssed with mayo-

You have such little credibility here that it is a wonder that you
even try anymore. What is the difference between pork fat and other
mammalian fats such as from beef . No prohibition against a well
marbled steak. Why is that? The food laws had obvious benefits.
Heart disease wasn't even close to being one of them. When your
average lifespan was only 35 years, there had to be a good reason
for giving up a source protein and high calories. Aside from
trichinosis, pigs rooted around in human waste and garbage, and
just handling the critters was a risk. Trichinosis was the main
reason given in the Christian History class that I took in college,
but that was over 30 years ago. If you have some weirdo claiming
that heart disease was the reason put the reference forward. The
way that it was presented in class was that trichinosis is a very
painful way to die and leaves a lasting impression on the survivors.

Ron Okimoto

Why is that? Here is why is that:

The Difference, ole' brainless one, is pigs do not have a way to
sweat, they do not have 2 stomachs, they do not chew the cud. IOW,
and to dumb it down for you, Pigs retain all of the toxins they eat
in their fat. And back then pigs ate only the garbage,feces, dead
animals, and the like, whereas cows ate grass and they chew their
cud. To further simplify it for you
retard ---pork meat has more toxins then beef. It is not necessarly
the fat that is the problem. It was the toxins retained in the fat.
Toxins that cause inflamation. The Inflamation is what causes the
heart disease.

Cattle retain toxins just as readily as any other mammal. Ruminating,
sweating, and the number of digestive chambers (how many stomachs does
a cow _really_ have?) is immaterial to the retention of chemical
toxins.

Note that you were the one to claim the reason for the ban on pork was
heart disease, not Ron. That argument was demolished pretty much
instantly. In fact, the link between diet and heart disease wasn't
really established until the 20th century. Now you're changing your
tune, attempting to weasel out of your previous claims. Go right
ahead, it's not like anyone really believes anything you say anyhow.

Chris

Do you LIKE lying to yourself and the rest of the world?

You're the one lying, Adman. Remember, you tried this "The dietary laws were given for health reasons" argument over in <http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/browse_frm/thread/1baae90d0f75fddd/d96f7b9dc7498a8b?hl=en> last summer where I handed you ass to you on a plate.

Of course, the fact that I did that to you on a number of different topics is probably why you never respond to me any more. :-)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: After a hard weeks work.
    ... ever come in contact with parasites like nematodes. ... not have that Biblical prohibition against eating pork if pigs ... Heart disease wasn't even close to being one of them. ... retard ---pork meat has more toxins then beef. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: After a hard weeks work.
    ... My graduate work was with nematodes. ... Heart disease wasn't even close to being one of them. ... pigs rooted around in human waste and garbage, ... Pigs retain all of the toxins they eat in their fat. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: After a hard weeks work.
    ... ever come in contact with parasites like nematodes. ... not have that Biblical prohibition against eating pork if pigs ... Heart disease wasn't even close to being one of them. ... retard ---pork meat has more toxins then beef. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: After a hard weeks work.
    ... My graduate work was with nematodes. ... chickens are a different matter and one of the problems with growing ... For some reason having birds in less ... pigs rooted around in human waste and garbage, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: After a hard weeks work.
    ... My graduate work was with nematodes. ... For some reason having birds in less ... that Biblical prohibition against eating pork if pigs (only areound ... pigs rooted around in human waste and garbage, ...
    (talk.origins)