The following is an actual question given on a University of Liverpool chemistry final exam. The answer by one student was so "profound" that the professor shared it with colleagues via the Internet, which is why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.
Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?
Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle's law that gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed or some variant.
One student, however, wrote the following:
First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave.. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that, if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell. Because Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay constant, the volume of Hell must expand proportionately as souls are added. This gives two possibilities:
1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.
2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.
So which is it? If we accept the postulate given to me by Sandra during my freshman year, that "it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is endothermic and has already frozen over. The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is extinct.... leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being - which explains why, last night, Sandra kept shouting "Oh my God."
THIS STUDENT RECEIVED THE ONLY "A".
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Extending Your Expiration Date
The Birth Control Contraceptive Pill
This interview comes from The People's Chemist (TPC)
http://www.thepeopleschemist.com/
TPC: What are birth control pills made of, and are the ingredients natural?
Dr. Sheridan: Birth control pills (BCP's) fall into 2 main categories. The first category contains estrogen (or an estrogenic drug) and a progestin. The second category contains a progestin only. Those containing the estrogen and progestin components are the most common form. The both components serve to shut down ovarian function, thus preventing ovulation. The progestin has an additional effect. Progestins disrupt the endometrial lining of the uterus. Therefore, if ovulation does occur (yes, BCP's can fail), the progestin changes the endometrial lining so implantation cannot occur and the pregnancy is aborted. The estrogen (estradiol) in some BCP's is indeed a hormone, so it is natural. Some BCP's contain ethinyl-estradiol instead of estriol. Ethinyl-estradiolis a drug, in my opinion since it is not made by humans. As far as I know, the human body doesn't make ethinyl-anything! In my view, if the body does not make it, it is not a hormone-period. In fact the ethinyl group is a very reactive chemical entity. The fe deral government's so-called MSDS (a type of chemical information sheet) states that ethinyl-estradiol is extremely hazardous if taken internally! That doesn?t sound natural to me. However, it seems Big Pharma believes its good enough for women in spite of what the MSDS states.
TPC: Birth control pills are convenient to use. Does the risk of using them outweigh the benefit?
Dr. Sheridan: I don't believe so. When a woman takes BCP's, she does not ovulate. That is their function and that is how they prevent pregnancy. If she does not ovulate, she does not make an appreciable amount of progesterone. Such women are called anovulatory. A study published in The American Journal of Epidemiology (1981) reveals to us that pre-menopausal women who do not ovulate have a 540% increase in breast cancer and a 1000% increase in overall cancer mortality. These are astounding numbers! In fact, since the incidence of breast cancer today is about 5 times the incidence of pre-BCP days, these statistics are even more dramatic. There are other medical facts that support my concerns that BCP's are devastating to women. I believe that regardless of age, pregnancy is safer than BCP's. We've known since at least the late 70's that women with the most children have the least breast cancer. I learned that in med school in the early 80's. There's more. There are three separate cancer studies where progesterone was added to cancer cells growing in tissue cultures. In all three, all cancer growth stopped! Note I didn't say cancer growth slowed down. It stopped. In each of these studies, approximately 40%, 50% or 60% of the cancer cells died. That's dead cancer cells. What is the purpose of cancer chemotherapy? Why is this information left to gather dust? The answer lay in the fact that Big Pharma can't patent a hormone. No patent; no mega bucks; it seems to be simple arithmetic. Does the benefit of BCP's outweigh the risk? I don't believe so at all. I believe that BCP's are an assault on women. I believe the most egregious statistic is that the earlier a girls starts BCP's the greater the negative potential. Again, when weighing risk/benefit, I believe pregnancy is safer. I'm ashamed that I once prescribed BCP's. What was I thinking?! Sadly, I wasn't. I was just doing what I was told.
TPC: My OB/GYN told me that taking birth control pills makes my body think it's pregnant. Is this true?
Dr. Sheridan: I think that this is far from the truth! Remember, the BCP contains at least one, if not two drugs! A woman's body does not make drugs as part of pregnancy. In fact, an extra dose of BCP's is one type of morning after abortion method, so how can this be true? When a woman is pregnant, she makes about 300-400 mg of progesterone daily. She does not ovulate, but that is a lot of proge sterone being made! Now she does not ovulate when she is menopausal either, but the similarity stops there because in menopause, she makes little or no progesterone. I believe BCP's mimic menopause but definitely not pregnancy. I believe that the party line described above is just because you can't market menopause to a 20-something young lady. Its just not a sexy, care-free image that makes an attractive image for a young lady.
TPC: If birth control pill use increases my risk of cancer, why is my OB/GYN still recommending them?
Dr. Sheridan: I believe that like me decades ago, most docs believe what they are told. They act in good faith, but don't really think much about what they are doing. Unfortunately, few realize that we are essentially trained by drug companies. Since so many med school professors are doing drug research, their natural bias is in this direction. It boils down to who controls the purse strings of med ical schools. Big Pharma also controls most CME (Continuing Medical Education) and is actually entrenched in the organizations making up the ACCME. This is the governing body that determines much of what goes on in CME meetings. When it comes to education, Big Pharma makes sure it is involved and that their view will be the view.
TPC: What other contraception alternatives are there, and what is their success rate?
Dr. Sheridan: Well, there are 3 methods with success rates rivaling BCP's without the associated risks. Using condoms plus foam or using a diaphragm plus spermacide offers about the same degree of protection against unwanted pregnancy. Those are two commonly used choices. Natural family planning methods done thoroughly (and properly) seem to be in the same category. Couple to Couple League International (CCLI.org) teaches natural family planning all over the country. I have close to 10 couples who taught me about natural family planning. There is not one unplanned pregnancy in the group and each has been married between 5 and 10 years. That represents about 50 to 100 years of child-bearing years. This is certainly longer than a woman's natural fertile years, so this is also an excellent choice. It takes a little discipline, bit the risks of BCP's can be avoided.
About Dr. Sheridan
After traditional medicine had failed him both personally and professionally, Dr. Sheridan turned to an alternative approach of medicine - one which treats patients to achieve health and wellness naturally. Dr. Sheridan, a native of Clifton, New Jersey, graduated from the University of Arizona College of Medicine in 1985. As a 3rd year resident of Family Medicine, he had the opportunity to attend a convention for the American Association of Family Physicians. It was there that he first learned about the Pan American Allergy Society. Because he had always struggled w ith allergies since he was a child, the Society particularly piqued his interest. At that point, he chose to add allergies to his family practice repertoire. Through his affiliation with the Pan American Allergy Society, he made the acquaintance of Dr. Hotze. He was particularly interested in the success that Dr. Hotze had achieved with his patients through his own practice. After exploring his options and realizing that his own goals and knowledge of allergy and thyroid problems were aligned with those of the Hotze Health & Wellness Center, he joined the staff as a physician in 2002. Dr. Sheridan has written a number of articles in the Health & Wellness newsletter and also serves as one of the talk show hosts on KSEV 700 on Health & Wellness.
About the People's Chemist - author
Ellison's entire career has been dedicated to the study of molecules; how they give life and how they take from it. He was a two-time recipient of the prestigiou s Howard Hughes Medical Institute Research Grant for his research in biochemistry and physiology. He is a bestselling author, holds a master's degree in organic chemistry and has first-hand experience in drug design. Use his knowledge and insight to look and feel your best in 90 days with his AM-PM Fat Loss Discovery: http://www.thepeopleschemist.com/obesity_cure.php
This interview comes from The People's Chemist (TPC)
http://www.thepeopleschemist.com/
TPC: What are birth control pills made of, and are the ingredients natural?
Dr. Sheridan: Birth control pills (BCP's) fall into 2 main categories. The first category contains estrogen (or an estrogenic drug) and a progestin. The second category contains a progestin only. Those containing the estrogen and progestin components are the most common form. The both components serve to shut down ovarian function, thus preventing ovulation. The progestin has an additional effect. Progestins disrupt the endometrial lining of the uterus. Therefore, if ovulation does occur (yes, BCP's can fail), the progestin changes the endometrial lining so implantation cannot occur and the pregnancy is aborted. The estrogen (estradiol) in some BCP's is indeed a hormone, so it is natural. Some BCP's contain ethinyl-estradiol instead of estriol. Ethinyl-estradiolis a drug, in my opinion since it is not made by humans. As far as I know, the human body doesn't make ethinyl-anything! In my view, if the body does not make it, it is not a hormone-period. In fact the ethinyl group is a very reactive chemical entity. The fe deral government's so-called MSDS (a type of chemical information sheet) states that ethinyl-estradiol is extremely hazardous if taken internally! That doesn?t sound natural to me. However, it seems Big Pharma believes its good enough for women in spite of what the MSDS states.
TPC: Birth control pills are convenient to use. Does the risk of using them outweigh the benefit?
Dr. Sheridan: I don't believe so. When a woman takes BCP's, she does not ovulate. That is their function and that is how they prevent pregnancy. If she does not ovulate, she does not make an appreciable amount of progesterone. Such women are called anovulatory. A study published in The American Journal of Epidemiology (1981) reveals to us that pre-menopausal women who do not ovulate have a 540% increase in breast cancer and a 1000% increase in overall cancer mortality. These are astounding numbers! In fact, since the incidence of breast cancer today is about 5 times the incidence of pre-BCP days, these statistics are even more dramatic. There are other medical facts that support my concerns that BCP's are devastating to women. I believe that regardless of age, pregnancy is safer than BCP's. We've known since at least the late 70's that women with the most children have the least breast cancer. I learned that in med school in the early 80's. There's more. There are three separate cancer studies where progesterone was added to cancer cells growing in tissue cultures. In all three, all cancer growth stopped! Note I didn't say cancer growth slowed down. It stopped. In each of these studies, approximately 40%, 50% or 60% of the cancer cells died. That's dead cancer cells. What is the purpose of cancer chemotherapy? Why is this information left to gather dust? The answer lay in the fact that Big Pharma can't patent a hormone. No patent; no mega bucks; it seems to be simple arithmetic. Does the benefit of BCP's outweigh the risk? I don't believe so at all. I believe that BCP's are an assault on women. I believe the most egregious statistic is that the earlier a girls starts BCP's the greater the negative potential. Again, when weighing risk/benefit, I believe pregnancy is safer. I'm ashamed that I once prescribed BCP's. What was I thinking?! Sadly, I wasn't. I was just doing what I was told.
TPC: My OB/GYN told me that taking birth control pills makes my body think it's pregnant. Is this true?
Dr. Sheridan: I think that this is far from the truth! Remember, the BCP contains at least one, if not two drugs! A woman's body does not make drugs as part of pregnancy. In fact, an extra dose of BCP's is one type of morning after abortion method, so how can this be true? When a woman is pregnant, she makes about 300-400 mg of progesterone daily. She does not ovulate, but that is a lot of proge sterone being made! Now she does not ovulate when she is menopausal either, but the similarity stops there because in menopause, she makes little or no progesterone. I believe BCP's mimic menopause but definitely not pregnancy. I believe that the party line described above is just because you can't market menopause to a 20-something young lady. Its just not a sexy, care-free image that makes an attractive image for a young lady.
TPC: If birth control pill use increases my risk of cancer, why is my OB/GYN still recommending them?
Dr. Sheridan: I believe that like me decades ago, most docs believe what they are told. They act in good faith, but don't really think much about what they are doing. Unfortunately, few realize that we are essentially trained by drug companies. Since so many med school professors are doing drug research, their natural bias is in this direction. It boils down to who controls the purse strings of med ical schools. Big Pharma also controls most CME (Continuing Medical Education) and is actually entrenched in the organizations making up the ACCME. This is the governing body that determines much of what goes on in CME meetings. When it comes to education, Big Pharma makes sure it is involved and that their view will be the view.
TPC: What other contraception alternatives are there, and what is their success rate?
Dr. Sheridan: Well, there are 3 methods with success rates rivaling BCP's without the associated risks. Using condoms plus foam or using a diaphragm plus spermacide offers about the same degree of protection against unwanted pregnancy. Those are two commonly used choices. Natural family planning methods done thoroughly (and properly) seem to be in the same category. Couple to Couple League International (CCLI.org) teaches natural family planning all over the country. I have close to 10 couples who taught me about natural family planning. There is not one unplanned pregnancy in the group and each has been married between 5 and 10 years. That represents about 50 to 100 years of child-bearing years. This is certainly longer than a woman's natural fertile years, so this is also an excellent choice. It takes a little discipline, bit the risks of BCP's can be avoided.
About Dr. Sheridan
After traditional medicine had failed him both personally and professionally, Dr. Sheridan turned to an alternative approach of medicine - one which treats patients to achieve health and wellness naturally. Dr. Sheridan, a native of Clifton, New Jersey, graduated from the University of Arizona College of Medicine in 1985. As a 3rd year resident of Family Medicine, he had the opportunity to attend a convention for the American Association of Family Physicians. It was there that he first learned about the Pan American Allergy Society. Because he had always struggled w ith allergies since he was a child, the Society particularly piqued his interest. At that point, he chose to add allergies to his family practice repertoire. Through his affiliation with the Pan American Allergy Society, he made the acquaintance of Dr. Hotze. He was particularly interested in the success that Dr. Hotze had achieved with his patients through his own practice. After exploring his options and realizing that his own goals and knowledge of allergy and thyroid problems were aligned with those of the Hotze Health & Wellness Center, he joined the staff as a physician in 2002. Dr. Sheridan has written a number of articles in the Health & Wellness newsletter and also serves as one of the talk show hosts on KSEV 700 on Health & Wellness.
About the People's Chemist - author
Ellison's entire career has been dedicated to the study of molecules; how they give life and how they take from it. He was a two-time recipient of the prestigiou s Howard Hughes Medical Institute Research Grant for his research in biochemistry and physiology. He is a bestselling author, holds a master's degree in organic chemistry and has first-hand experience in drug design. Use his knowledge and insight to look and feel your best in 90 days with his AM-PM Fat Loss Discovery: http://www.thepeopleschemist.com/obesity_cure.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)