Meh. - Page 214

taxwonk · 11-09-2005, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bold_n_brazen
Point of clarification, love. It's "Hank's wife", not just anyone's wife.

No, it's also Sebby's wife. Nobody takes a shot at my wife, because they figure she's married to me, so life's hard enough.

Mr. Man · 11-09-2005, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NotFromHere
A man who said he was convinced his cat's behavior showed who should live and who should die has been sentenced to 50 years in prison for first-degree murder, the top of the standard range.

Prosecutors said Butsch was delusional and high on methamphetamine but knew what he was doing when he killed Vavricka on Jan. 24, 2004. Vavricka's body was found the next day in some illegally dumped garbage.

Butsch believed his cat Sam was the reincarnation of a kitten he had baked to death in an oven 10 years ago and thus could show him who was evil and who was good.

According to testimony in his trial, Butsch shot Vavricka, who was asleep at the time in Butsch's fifth-wheel trailer in Lake Stevens, after the cat refused to go near him.

As a variety of people here can attest to, my cat does the same thing. However, (a) I have not shot anyone, (b) I have never baked a kitten and would maim anyone who did, (c) I currently am not high on meth, and (d) the cat doesn't stay away from the evil person so much as bare its fangs, screams and generally scares the bejesus out of the evil person.

taxwonk · 11-09-2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
Is he any different from the piano-playing Liberace?

He would be to you.

bold_n_brazen · 11-09-2005, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I don't know that I could actually be with someone who would tenderize children with a truck. It seems unsanitary.

This is my favorite post of yours, ever. Of all of the 10,000+, this one is the creme de la creme. Thank you, Fringey. Please take a bow.

tmdiva · 11-09-2005, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
According to my health expert, ductal cysts and growths are considered by many oncologists to be pre-cancerous, and the cure rate is very high. They frequently recur, but as long as they're being watched, they present relatively low risk.

Well, I'm pretty sure this is cancer, not pre-cancer, though I haven't actually talked to the person in question. It's my aunt, my mother's sister, and she had a lumpectomy for a previous cancer about 15 years ago (when she had a small infant from an unplanned mid-forties pregnancy). My mom didn't say anything about lymph nodes being involved. I'm just trying to gauge how worried I should be--she's my favorite aunt.

tm

sebastian_dangerfield · 11-09-2005, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
We are all impressed by everyone's doctor relatives. And while what you say is absolutely true, knowing whether the stats are 10% survival rate over 3 years versus 90% survival rate over 3 years does, to me, help manage anxiety. Not if I were sick or a direct family member were sick, because either way I'd be very focused on putting my energy on having them or me be in the surviving part, but with generalized worry for people I don't know as well or the kind of third-hand support type stuff. Managing expectations. We all know that even if there's a 90% complete remission rate, any particular person might die -- it's not like every person ends up 90% alive or whatever.

You shouldn't be very impressed. Being a doc is no big shakes. Its like being a lawyer.

We're talking past one another. I agree with your point re generall disease management based on blind stats. How else can you predict anything?

Where I get off the train is when people start worshipping stats without taking into account that most of them are not taking the adequate number of variables into account. If I say "X number of people with breast cancer will live 5 years," I'm looking at one factor - death rates. Not a very reliable stat. The statisticians haven't looked into what particular shared traits those people had which caused them to live 5 years, and what traits caused others not to live five years. They just hand people big, fat general numbers. A better analysis would avoid death rates (which are also not very much value because many people get disease are old, and die of something else soon anyway) and categorize survival by disease characteristics. Those better stats are out there, but amazingly, a lot of lazy people still rely on big general studies to select treatment and offer predictions.

But that's just health care... tip of the iceberg. Think of how much of our daily lives are manuevered with general stats (insurance, lending, securities). Stats are wonderful, but I think (and I thought this before delving into books critiquing stats) people worship them far too much. You can't card count your way through life, but people seem to really get pissed and bristle when you tell them to take "the numbers" with a grain of salt.

Stats to me are like a financial report without a cash flow stmt. You get an idea of what's going on, but you can never be really sure. The info's treated.

spookyfish · 11-09-2005, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tmdiva
Well, I'm pretty sure this is cancer, not pre-cancer, though I haven't actually talked to the person in question. It's my aunt, my mother's sister, and she had a lumpectomy for a previous cancer about 15 years ago (when she had a small infant from an unplanned mid-forties pregnancy). My mom didn't say anything about lymph nodes being involved. I'm just trying to gauge how worried I should be--she's my favorite aunt.

tm

I'm sorry to hear about that, and I hope everything turns out well.

sebastian_dangerfield · 11-09-2005, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
No, it's also Sebby's wife. Nobody takes a shot at my wife, because they figure she's married to me, so life's hard enough.

Its nice to know something in her life is hard...

Not Bob · 11-09-2005, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
Is he any different from the piano-playing Liberace?

AoN, funny part in the new "Good Night, and Good Luck" -- Edward R. Murrow interviewing Liberace.

(Good flick, btw.)

bold_n_brazen · 11-09-2005, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Its nice to know something in her life is hard...

That was so. cold.

Hank Chinaski · 11-09-2005, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
You shouldn't be very impressed. Being a doc is no big shakes. Its like being a lawyer.

We're talking past one another. I agree with your point re generall disease management based on blind stats. How else can you predict anything?

Where I get off the train is when people start worshipping stats without taking into account that most of them are not taking the adequate number of variables into account. If I say "X number of people with breast cancer will live 5 years," I'm looking at one factor - death rates. Not a very reliable stat. The statisticians haven't looked into what particular shared traits those people had which caused them to live 5 years, and what traits caused others not to live five years. They just hand people big, fat general numbers. A better analysis would avoid death rates (which are also not very much value because many people get disease are old, and die of something else soon anyway) and categorize survival by disease characteristics. Those better stats are out there, but amazingly, a lot of lazy people still rely on big general studies to select treatment and offer predictions.

But that's just health care... tip of the iceberg. Think of how much of our daily lives are manuevered with general stats (insurance, lending, securities). Stats are wonderful, but I think (and I thought this before delving into books critiquing stats) people worship them far too much. You can't card count your way through life, but people seem to really get pissed and bristle when you tell them to take "the numbers" with a grain of salt.

Stats to me are like a financial report without a cash flow stmt. You get an idea of what's going on, but you can never be really sure. The info's treated.

This is one of the special 10% of your posts; the ones I can understand and agree with.

NotFromHere · 11-09-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Old Gold was always secretely marketed to gays. By the 50s they were actually hiring fucking Liberace for ads. This ad is saying the guy (look at him- seriously) found his "Queen"- something phallic that could still wear pretty shoes.

So when you watched these commercials in the 50's were they on your own TV set or did you have to go to the neighbors?

spookyfish · 11-09-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
This is one of the special 10% of your posts; the ones I can understand and agree with.

Good god. I find myself agreeing with Hank and Sebby.

sebastian_dangerfield · 11-09-2005, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I don't know that I could actually be with someone who would tenderize children with a truck. It seems unsanitary.

Oh hell... I'll let this cat out of the bag because, well, its just too damned perfect.

My wife is knocked up. Amazing. I always figured I was firing blanks... Happy Fucking Holidays, Sebby!

And because she is, I just bought another hugeass SUV. Why you might ask? Because the one I have is getting up there in miles and the one I was offered was at a price I could not refuse. Its heavier than a tank and the way I see it, she will never get hurt in it during her often dangerous winter commute.

I wanted to write this yesterday in response to the convo regarding people buying cars to protect kids, but I bit my lip.

I just tired of biting. I had to cough this one up...

dtb · 11-09-2005, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Oh hell... I'll let this cat out of the bag because, well, its just too damned perfect.

My wife is knocked up. Amazing.

Just to beat everyone to the punch:

Who is the father?