Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Inca Skull Surgeons Were "Highly Skilled," Study Finds

Inca Skull Surgeons Were "Highly Skilled," Study Finds
Scott Norris
for National Geographic News
May 12, 2008

Inca surgeons in ancient Peru commonly and successfully removed small portions of patients' skulls to treat head injuries, according to a new study.

The surgical procedure—known as trepanation—was most often performed on adult men, likely to treat injuries suffered during combat, researchers say.

A similar procedure is performed today to relieve pressure caused by fluid buildup following severe head trauma.

Around the ancient Inca capital of Cuzco (see Peru map), remains dating back to A.D. 1000 show that surgical techniques were standardized and perfected over time, according to the report.

Many of the oldest skulls showed no evidence of bone healing following the operation, suggesting that the procedure was probably fatal.

But by the 1400s, survival rates approached 90 percent, and infection levels were very low, researchers say.

The new findings show that Inca surgeons had developed a detailed knowledge of cranial anatomy, said lead author Valerie Andrushko, of Southern Connecticut State University in New Haven.

"These people were skilled surgeons," she said.

Beer, Plants Aided Patients

Inca healers carefully avoided areas of the skull where cutting would be more likely to cause brain injury, bleeding, or infection, Verushko noted.

The operations were conducted without the modern benefits of anesthesia and antibiotics, but medicinal plants were probably used, she said.

"They were aware of the medicinal properties of many wild plants, including coca and wild tobacco," Verushko said.

"These, along with maize beer, may have been used to alleviate some of the pain.

"Natural antiseptics such as balsam and saponins [plants with soaplike properties] may have reduced the likelihood of infection following trepanation," she added.

The new study was recently published online in The American Journal of Physical Anthropology.

"Skull Was Slowly Scraped Away"

Verushko and study co-author John Verano of Tulane University in New Orleans studied remains from 11 burial sites in Cuzco and the surrounding region.

(See related photos: "Frozen Inca Mummy Goes On Display" [September 11, 2007].)

Their survey found that trepanation was a remarkably common practice in the Inca capital. Of 411 skulls that were sufficiently well preserved to study, 66 had holes cut through the bone.

In one location, 21 of 59 skulls—over a third—had received trepanation.

While methods of trepanation varied over time, Inca surgeons eventually settled on a scraping technique to penetrate the skull without causing wider injury.

"The skull was slowly scraped away, resulting in a circular hole surrounded by a wider area of scraped bone," Verushko said.

Some of the skulls had been perforated more than once, including one individual who had undergone the operation seven times.

In another unusual case, in which the patient did not survive the operation, a rectangular section of bone that had been removed was set back in place prior to burial.

Tiffiny Tung is an archaeologist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, and was not part of the research.

She said that the new study is the first to compare the frequency and success rate of trepanation over time and in different communities.

"This is the kind of richly detailed study that really gives us a sense of what life was like for ancient Andean populations," Tung said.

"It's astounding that [such a large percentage] of the population underwent skull surgery and that so many survived."

War Wounds

Trepanation was practiced as early as 400 B.C. in South America and is known from other parts of the world as well.

Archaeologists have long debated whether the skull perforations were conducted as a medical procedure or for ritual or cultural reasons.

With regard to the Inca, Tung said, the new study should settle the debate.

"I think the authors are spot on when they suggest that cranial surgery was performed primarily to treat head injuries," she said.

Those injuries may have most often been sustained during warfare, according to the new study's authors.

Nearly all of the surgeries were performed either near the middle of the skull or on the left side—the regions most likely to be injured during combat with a right-handed opponent, Verushko noted.

In addition, some of the skulls showed signs of previous injury in the area where the operation was performed.

The fact that 19 of the surgical patients were women, however, suggests that the operation may have sometimes been performed for other reasons—possibly as an attempted cure for epilepsy or chronic bone infection, the authors note.

Files released on UFO sightings

A sketch of a UFO [Pic: National Archives]
This is how one person described the UFO they had seen

Secret files on UFO sightings have been made available for the first time by the Ministry of Defence.

The documents, which can be downloaded from the National Archives website, cover the period from 1978 to 1987.

They include accounts of strange lights in the sky and unexplained objects being spotted by the public, armed forces and police officers.

One man explained in great detail his "physical and psychic contact" with green aliens since he was a child.

The writer said that one of them, called Algar, was killed in 1981 by another race of beings as he was about to make contact with the UK government.

The letter's author said he visited their bases in the Wirral and Cheshire, while his wife reported seeing a UFO shot down over Wallasey on Merseyside.

The eight released files are part of almost 200 files set to be made available over the next four years.

These documents will be available to download for free for the first month.

A spokesman for the National Archives said they were now becoming available after several requests made under the Freedom of Information Act, and also because of a "proactive move by the Ministry of Defence for an open and transparent government".

Much of the previously classified paperwork is made up of correspondence from the public sent to government officials, such as the MoD and then-prime minister Margaret Thatcher.

You can go. You are too old and too infirm for our purpose
Reported alien comment to pensioner

Another document reveals the experiences of a 78-year-old man who alleged that he met an alien beside Basingstoke Canal in Aldershot, Hampshire in 1983.

He said he went on board the craft, giving a detailed explanation of it, before being quizzed by the aliens about his age.

He was then told: "You can go. You are too old and too infirm for our purpose."

'Britain's Roswell'

Another letter, from the director of a group called the Wigan Ariel Phenomena Investigation Team, asks the MoD if it had a code of practice for dealing with an alien invasion.

A further document reveals how, on 21 February 1982, a group of customers and staff at a Tunbridge Wells pub reported an unknown object with green and red flashing lights - seen heading in the direction of Gatwick airport.

There are some reports from more official sources. The United States Air Force filed a report about two USAF policemen who saw "unusual lights outside the back gate at RAF Woodbridge" in Suffolk in December 1980.

Let me assure this House that Her Majesty's government has never been approached by people from outer space
Government briefing to House of Lords

This relates to the well-known incident of an alleged alien encounter at Rendlesham Forest, dubbed "Britain's Roswell" after the supposed contact made with aliens at Roswell in the United States.

Several drawings are visible in the files from those keen to demonstrate what they had seen.

One such sketch was made by Metropolitan Police officers, who were called out to a house in Stanmore in the London Borough of Harrow on 26 April, 1984.

Three officers spent an hour observing the object in the sky, which "moved erratically from side to side, up and down and to and fro, not venturing far from the original position".

One of the Pcs, who saw the object through binoculars, described it as "circular in the middle with what appeared to be a dome on top and underneath" with different coloured lights.

Common explanations

Visitors to the National Archives site will also find a videocast from Nick Pope, a British UFO specialist.

Mr Pope picked out one incident where a UFO was spotted over central London.

A sketch of a UFO [Pic: National Archives]
A sketch of a UFO, made by a Metropolitan Police officer

"This is a very interesting illustration that, actually, UFOs are seen in built-up areas. People have this idea they're seen in desolate, rural places.

"There's a sighting actually on Waterloo bridge, when a number of witnesses actually stopped to look at this UFO that was seen over the Thames."

Mr Pope said the most common explanation for UFOs were aircraft lights, bright stars and planets, satellites, meteors, or airships.

A detailed briefing is available within the files, which was prepared by the MoD for Lord Strabolgi, then government chief whip, for a debate on UFOs in the House of Lords in January 1979.

The briefing said that "there is nothing to indicate that UFOlogy is anything but claptrap" and that the idea of an "inter-governmental conspiracy of silence" was "the most astonishing and the most flattering claim of all".

Newsnight's report on UFO sightings - and crop circles

The briefing goes on to say: "Let me assure this House that Her Majesty's government has never been approached by people from outer space."

Also available on the website is a podcast from Dr David Clarke, an expert in UFO history, discussing the files.

Dr Clarke, who is a lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University, told the BBC's Radio 4 Today programme that conspiracy theories about aliens are "very difficult to disprove".

He said: "I doubt the disclosure of these files will convince those who believe there is an official cover-up.

"Inevitably, some have already dismissed this release as a whitewash. For them the 'truth' still remains out there, hidden no doubt in more above top secret files hidden somewhere else."

The Japanese Rush Hour Train Experience

In Japan, millions of people rely on the subway to get to work since the trains always run on time.

The number of people that ride them during rush hour is incredible, and the crowd is heaviest in the mornings.

To make things work, riders waste no time getting aboard, they fill the cars to capacity and even a little bit more. It’s the “little bit more” that could cause problems. If the doors can’t close, the train can’t leave on time.

tokyo-subway.jpg

To ensure the cars are full and the doors are closed, uniformed attendants cram the last few riders into the cars.

Think about an overstuffed suitcase you have to sit on to close and you’re just about ready to be a subway attendant.

What to do if the police stop you

Being stopped by the cops is scary. This Instructable gives you everything you need to know to safeguard your rights when you are dealing with the police.

All of the information here is straight from the American Civil Liberties Union.
What to do if the police stop you

Being stopped by the cops is scary. This Instructable gives you everything you need to know to safeguard your rights when you are dealing with the police.

All of the information here is straight from the American Civil Liberties Union.
loading...
250x249 : FHRX9Z8FDYPTB0W (0)
i


1. What you say to the police is always important. What you say can be used against you, and it can give the police an excuse to arrest you, especially if you badmouth a police officer.

2. You must show your driver's license and registration when stopped in a car. Otherwise, you don't have to answer any questions if you are detained or arrested, with one important exception. The police may ask for your name if you have been properly detained, and you can be arrested in some states for refusing to give it. If you reasonably fear that your name is incriminating, you can claim the right to remain silent, which may be a defense in case you are arrested anyway.

3. You do not have to consent to any search of yourself, your car or your house. If you DO consent to a search, it can affect your rights later in court. If the police say they have a search warrant, ASK TO SEE IT.

4. Do not interfere with, or obstruct the police, as you you can be arrested for it.

Remember:
Think carefully about your words, movement, body language, and emotions.
Do not get into an argument with the police.
Anything you say or do can be used against you.
Keep your hands where the police can see them.
Do not run. Do not touch any police officer.
Do not resist even if you believe you are innocent.
Do not complain on the scene or tell the police they are wrong or that you are going to file a complaint.
Do not make any statements regarding the incident.
Ask for a lawyer immediately upon your arrest.
Remember officer badge & patrol car numbers.
Write down everything you remember ASAP.
Try to find witnesses & their names & phone numbers.
If you are injured, take photographs of the injuries as soon as possible, but make sure you seek medical attention first.

If you feel your rights have been violated, file a written complaint with police department internal affairs division or civilian complaint board, or call the ACLU hotline, 1-877-6-PROFILE.
loading...
218x217 : FK8AD3IFDYPTB0R (0)
i


1. If the police knock and ask to enter your home, you do not have to admit them unless they have a warrant signed by a judge.

2. However, in some emergency situations (like when a person is screaming for help inside, or when the police are chasing someone) officers are allowed to enter and search your home without a warrant.

3. If you are arrested, the police can search you and the area close by. If you are in a building, 'close by' usually means just the room you are in.


loading...
226x221 : FTUUQQVFDYPTB0T (0)
i


1. It's not a crime to refuse to answer questions, but refusing to answer might make the police suspicious about you. If you are asked to identify yourself, you must show your driver's license and registration when stopped in a car. Otherwise, you don't have to answer any questions if you are detained or arrested, with one important exception: The police may ask for your name if you have been properly detained, and you can be arrested in some states for refusing to give it. If you reasonably fear that your name is incriminating, you can claim the right to remain silent, which may be a defense in case you are arrested anyway

2. Police may pat-down your clothing if they suspect a concealed weapon. Do not physically resist, but make it clear that you do not consent to any further search.

3. Ask if you are under arrest. If you are, you have a right to know why.

4. Do not bad-mouth the police officer or run away, even if you believe what is happening is unreasonable. That could lead to your arrest.
loading...
239x226 : FZUOBY5FDYPTB0V (0)
i


1. Upon request, show them your driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance. In certain cases, your car can be searched without a warrant as long as the police have probable cause. To protect yourself later, you should make it clear that you do not consent to a search. It is not lawful for police to arrest you simply for refusing to consent to a search.

2. If you are given a ticket, you should sign it; otherwise you can be arrested. You can always fight the case in court later.

3. If you are suspected of drunk driving (DWI) and refuse to take a blood, urine or breath test, your driver's license may be suspended.
loading...
238x227 : F2H3IEYFDYPTB0U (0)
i


1. You have the right to remain silent and to talk to a lawyer before you talk to the police. Tell the police nothing except your name and address. Do not give any explanations, excuses or stories. You can make your defense later, in court, based on what you and your lawyer decide is best.

2. Ask to see a lawyer immediately. If you can not pay for a lawyer, you have a right to a free one, and should ask the police how the lawyer can be contacted. Do not say anything without a lawyer.

3. Within a reasonable time after your arrest, or booking, you have the right to make a local phone call: to a lawyer, bail bondsman, a relative or any other person. The police may not listen to the call to the lawyer.

4. Sometimes you can be released without bail, or have bail lowered. Have your lawyer ask the judge about this possibility. You must be taken before the judge on the next court day after arrest.

5. Do not make any decisions in your case until you have talked with a lawyer.
loading...
261x262 : F7JM247FDYPTB0S (0)
i


All written content in this Instructable is from the ACLU's "What to Do if You Are Stopped by the Police" wallet card, which you can download here. Print out a copy, laminate it, and stick it in your wallet so that you have it when it matters most.

Finally. . .

The ACLU is America's most important non-governmental defender of the Bill of Rights and your personal freedoms. Go check out their website and consider getting involved!
loading...
184x287 : FHFV97UFDYPTB3Z (0)
i

This is insane -Drug War


Drug-War Bulletins

Three of them:

1. In Seattle, a fifty-six-year old man died last Thursday after being refused a liver transplant because he had followed his doctor’s recommendation to use marijuana to ease the symptoms of hepatitis C. From the Associated Press story:

His death came a week after a doctor told him a University of Washington Medical Center committee had again denied him a spot on the liver transplant list. The team had previously told him it would not consider placing him on the list until he completed a 60-day drug-treatment class…

The Virginia-based United Network for Organ Sharing, which oversees the nation’s transplant system, leaves it to individual hospitals to develop criteria for transplant candidates.

At some, people who use “illicit substances”—including medical marijuana, even in the dozen states that allow it—are automatically rejected. At others, patients are given a chance to reapply if they stay clean for six months.

The cruelty and stupidity of this beggars belief. This patient did not need “drug treatment.” He was already undergoing drug treatment. Nor did he need to get “clean.” He was already clean. It’s the drug war that’s dirty. (H/t: John Leone.)

2. Until about a week ago, Marie Day Walsh was a hyper-respectable fifty-three-year-old housewife living in suburban comfort in Del Mar, California, near San Diego, with her husband of twenty-three years. They have two grown daughters and another still in high school. Then came a knock on the door. She was arrested and carted off to jail.

The back story: In 1975, when she was a nineteen-year-old hippie in Saginaw, Michigan, and her name was Susan LeFevre, she got arrested for peripheral involvement in a heroin deal. While awaiting trial, she took college courses. Hoping for mercy, she pleaded guilty. The judge, full of righteous wrath, sentenced her to ten to twenty years in prison. After a year or so, she walked away from a prison work site, escaping as she had offended: nonviolently. She had never been in trouble before and has never been in trouble since. Now she will probably be extradited to Michigan and imprisoned until she is in her sixties. Take a look at her and see if you think she is a menace to society.

3. Two years ago, a large-scale study by Dr. Donald Tashkin, of U.C.L.A., a pulmonologist whose previous studies of marijuana had been used by drug-enforcement authorities to support their view that pot is dangerous, unexpectedly concluded that there is no connection between marijuana smoking and lung cancer, even among heavy pot smokers, which he defined as people who had smoked more than twenty-two thousand joints, i.e., a joint a day for sixty years. The study, which was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, further suggested that pot might actually have some preventive effect.

The story didn’t get a lot of publicity, though the Washington Post did run a story on page A3. It will not surprise you to learn that it has had no effect on the nation’s drug “policies.”

Dr. Tashkin reiterated his findings last month before an audience of doctors and nurses. According to Fred Gardner’s detailed report,

Tashkin and his colleagues at U.C.L.A. conducted a major study in which they measured the lung function of various cohorts for eight years and found that tobacco-only smokers had an accelerated rate of decline, but marijuana smokers—even if they smoked tobacco as well—experienced the same rate of decline as non-smokers. “The more tobacco smoked, the greater the rate of decline,” said Tashkin. “In contrast, no matter how much marijuana was smoked, the rate of decline was similar to normal.” Tashkin concluded that his and other studies “do not support the concept that regular smoking of marijuana leads to COPD [Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease].”

On the other hand, imprisonment, disqualification for organ transplants, and the activities of the federal drug harassment industry remain hazardous to your health.


Monday, May 12, 2008

Solar Aircraft Begins Virtual Flight Today

Solar Aircraft Begins Virtual Flight Today – Check It Out Live

By Dave Demerjian EmailMay 12, 2008 | 7:00:00 AM

Image_9_raw

"In a world dependent on fossil energies, Solar Impulse is a paradox, almost a provocation."

Press release gobbledygook? Absolutely. But you've got to give it up for any company with the guts to try designing and building a true solar airplane.

We've written about Solar Impulse -- it's a consortium of European financial and technology parters led by the Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne, Switzerland. The group is working on a solar-powered plane that can take off under its own power without generating any emissions at all. The general idea is that sunlight would not only power the plane during the day but would also charge its lithium batteries, allowing it to fly around the clock pollution free.

Solar Impulse hopes to send its HB-SIA prototype on its first test flight next year, and in preparation is conducting a virtual flight in its new cockpit simulator. The cool part is that they've wired the simulator up with webcams so people can watch the test live.

Known as Virtual Flight 08, the simulation will begin at 10 a.m. Eastern time today (May 12) at Solar Impulse's hanger in Dubendorf. Two pilots will take turns at the controls on test flights that last 25 hours each, and Brian Jones, a Solar Impact techie perhaps best known for circling the earth in a balloon, will blog hourly about the simulation and take questions online.

The Solar Impulse people see this virtual flight as key to the development of the HB-SIA. Using a life-size cockpit model decked out with five panoramic screens, the simulation will allow Solar Impulse to test the plane's ergonomics and verify that its interface functions properly. The mission simulator uses elaborate algorithms to simulate breakdowns, real meteorological conditions and other incidents, which will sharpen the pilots' skills by forcing them to react on the fly.

You can see Virtual Flight 08 live -- we'll be watching too, and reporting back, but check it out and let us know what you think.

The 6 Most Frequently Quoted Bullsh*t Statistics

Every once in awhile, you'll hear a statistic so striking you can hardly believe it's true. Our first impulse is to repeat it, because knowing interesting things tends to make people like us better.

Unfortunately, some people are so desperate for interesting facts to quote, that they'll just pull them right out of their ass. Then those facts get repeated, by--you guessed it--people like us.

The six most quoted "too awesome to be true" stats that, in fact, are ...

#6.
You Accidentally Swallow About 8 Spiders a Year

This extremely commonly believed statistic has been fed to us by countless internet chain mails, and probably by some know-it-all kid who sat next to you in some class or other. When you sleep, you open your mouth to breath (and drool on your pillow), and supposedly this is the ideal window of oppurtunity for all the spiders who hang out near your bed hoping to be eaten alive.

Why Is It a Load of Crap?

Well, first of all, this a real kick in the crotch of the intellect of spiders everywhere. Although spiders are occasionally seen doing stupid things, it's safe to assume they have enough wit to realize when they're about to crawl through the mouth of a damned giant. If the giant white teeth aren't enough to deter them from going spelunking down your dark, wet throat (apparently no other animals have these) you'd think the heavy draft and deafening snoring sounds would be some sort of indication of how terrible a home your mouth would be.

Who Started It?

Back in 1993, people were already getting fooled by online urban legends at an amusing rate. So, a columnist for PC Professional named Lisa Holst decided to prove that you could make up anything on the internet and people would believe it.

She did this by making up a set of facts that were utterly ridiculous, the spider myth among them (which itself was taken from a collection of insect folklore that dates back to the 1950s), and unleashing it on the world in the form of emails.

In a twist of oh-so-predictable irony, people who forwarded chain mail about this just "happened" to forget to include the fact that these were completely fake.

Who Was Fooled?

Ask a group of internet strangers and you'll find at least a handful of people who wholeheartedly believe this myth. Presumably because they read it somewhere. You've even got this supposed entomologist from Experts.com quoting it.

In 2006 The UK's Daily Mirror warned that "the average person will swallow anything from eight to 20 spiders before they die."

Not satisfied to go along with the normal fudged data, The Mirror upped the ante of retardation by adding "A spider is also likely to drink from your eye at least THREE times in your life. Some experts have suggested they are attracted by the vibrations of snoring and the smell of undigested food - a good reason to floss your teeth before bedtime."

Really, is that what it takes to get the UK to worry about dental hygiene?

#5.
You Only Use 10% of Your Brain

You've heard it since you were a child, and it might have even crept into one of your textbooks: "We only use 10% of our brain! Just think what we'd be capable of if we could tap into the rest!"

The idea that the brain has UNLIMITED POTENTIAL is probably pretty appealing to 2nd grade teachers whose students complain that they can't do ONE MORE math problem. We still remember our teachers happily informing us that we're only using 10% of our brains, so we could do ten more if we wanted. The implication was of course that if we worked hard enough, we'd be able to set fire to the school with the power of our minds.

Why Is It a Load of Crap?

How fast are you reading this article? Well, let's suppose you are only using 10% of your brain. Now, read it 10x faster. Go, do it now! Are you having trouble? Yeah, that's because you can't devote that other 90% to just whatever you want. The parts of the brain are specialized, so trying to use all of it at once isn't going to make you any smarter. That would be like trying to become a better writer by striving to use all the keys on your keyboard in every sentence.

So the part of your brain you're using to read this article is not the same part you'll be using tonight when you get drunk and fight a hobo. There's even a special part of the brain that apparently keeps you from turning into a dick (No, really).

Who Started It?

There is a bit of debate on who exactly brought this bullshit statistic into the world. A series of neurologists over the past few hundred years figured out that a human can survive when parts of the brain are removed. Over time, this was misinterpreted to mean that the brain uses little of its potential, and thus the 10% statistic was born.

Facts tend to survive based on how interesting they are, rather than whether or not they're true.

Who Was Fooled?

Surely nobody takes this seriously any more, not when a ten-second Google search can tell you otherwise, right? Well don't tell that to Psychology Today, who ran that helpful 2006 article on how to access the lazy 90% of your grey matter.

One of their tips is to replenish the brain with nutrients, but we're assuming we get plenty with all the spiders we've eaten.

#4.
Men Think About Sex Every Seven Seconds

As we all know, men do nothing all day but think about having sex with their girlfriend/ex-girlfriend/friend that happens to be a girl/friend's sister. It should come naturally, then, that, on average, men think about sex every seven seconds or so, right? I mean, what else are men going to think about? Their jobs?

"Puhleaze, sister. We all know what's going on in there."

Why Is It a Load of Crap?

Let's suppose for a moment that you are a man. Have you thought about sex since you began reading this article? Well, probably, yes, because you just read the word "sex" several times. How about when you were reading the spider-eating segment moments ago? Were you imaging a massive spider-orgy? If so, you are unlike most men in the world. As a matter of fact, many experts estimate that 30% of men don't think about sex during the day at all. There are variants of this myth, usually ranging from 3 seconds to 20 seconds, but none of them are based on any actual research, and none of them are really true.

After all, how would they even arrive at such a number? Hook electrodes up to a dude's head and have him walk around for a week, counting how many times the sex lobe lights up?

Who Started It?

The origins of this statistic stretch long and far (no "that's what she said" intended), so again we can't pin it on a single person. We all know who it really was, though. A group of wives sitting at a table drinking tea or coffee, start talking about their horrible husbands. They just hate how it is always about sex sex sex sex sex. So, one of them pulls a number out of her head for a joke. "Did you know that men think about sex every seven seconds?"

The others have a good, womanly laugh about their husbands, and then they all run off to do womanly things, like quilting, or going to the bathroom at the same time. That's what women do, right? We don't really know.

Who Was Fooled?

Well, about half of us, according to this online poll. Countless sites are still including it among their "interesting facts" about sex, like this one and this one over here.

It seems like common sense would have squashed this one even before it got started. Obviously there are long stretches where a guy isn't thinking about sex (say, while spending 45 infuriating minutes on the phone with Microsoft tech support). To make up that average later he would have to think about sex every, what 2 seconds? So for the rest of the day his brain just turns into a spinning kaleidoscope of titty?

#3.
Spousal Abuse Skyrockets on Super Bowl Sunday

Surely watching the manliest of sports play out on the world stage brings out the redneck in all of us. It isn't too hard to imagine that a shitty husband or boyfriend might do something like this on Superbowl Sunday.

"Woman! Get me a beer! *smack*"

"Woman! Turn up the TV! I'm watching the Supabowl! *smack*"

"Woman! I don't wanna see you again for the next 2 hours unless you're nekked! *smack*"

And who hasn't been to a Super Bowl Party where one of the male guests gets into a fistfight with his wife in front of all their closest friends? What's that you say common sense? Pretty much everybody hasn't been to a party like that?

Why Is It a Load of Crap?

The problem with this statistic is that the kind of men who would hit their wives and girlfriends over something on TV are the kind of men who are already doing it anyway.

In reality, there is no solid evidence that suggests spouses are abused on Super Bowl Sunday, and in fact for some men the distraction of football might actually make them less likely to hit their wives.

Who Started It?

This myth reached its peak in 1993, when a series of battered women's advocates came forward claiming abuse hotline calls went up by as much as 40% on the day of the big game. Similar stats got repeated and inflated endlessly in the lead up to the Super Bowl, when every section of the paper is obligated to have a story about the Super Bowl, even if there's absolutely nothing to report. Oh newspapers, how we'll miss your journalistic integrity.

Who Was Fooled?

It becamse a big enough deal that NBC aired a public service announcement warning about the dangers of spousal abuse before the game. We hate to think how many abusive husbands, having settled in to watch football, saw the ad and thought, "Hey, that reminds me! I've been so preoccupied with the game that I haven't abused my wife today! Thanks, NBC!"

#2.
You Must Wait 30 Minutes After Eating Before Swimming

If at any time in your life you've had food in your hand near a swimming pool, you've heard this myth. You cannot swim until you've waited at least 30 minutes.

For some families, the more harsh "hour" rule was used. If you broke the rule, the implication was that you would get cramps, be unable to swim, drown, and die. This rule seemed to apply even if you stayed on the shallow end. According to this statistic, unlike air, water-to-skin contact has magical properties that cause the food in your belly to explode unless it is past a certain point in your digestive track.

Why Is It a Load of Crap?

Because you're not a Gremlin. As you may have already guessed, water does not, in fact, bear properties that form a cramp of death, should you get in the water after eating. Getting into the water after eating will have no more effect on your body than going for a walk.

In fact, the movement of your body in the water, particularly if you are just a little kid with floaties on, is more restricted than that of a typical walk. Granted, if you were to swim rigorously for exercise, you wouldn't want to jump in the pool and start swimming lines right after a big bowl of Chili unless your goal is to chum for some sharks with your mouth.

Who Started It?

This one actually comes from an old wives tale that slowly became popular over the years. Supposedly, your stomach is using oxygen to digest food that your muscles need to swim. In actuality, the amount of oxygen your body needs to swim is more than satisfied, whether or not you've eaten recently.

Who Was Fooled?

This cutesy little kids site is one of many offering swimming tips that still buys into the old "wait 30 minutes" rule.

These lies aren't without their consequences. What happens when they find out the 30 minute statistic is false. Doesn't that suggest that the other stuff on the page must be false, too? A horseplay revolution could arise, complete with much more serous acts of rebellions like kids diving in the shallow end, swimming during electrical storms and thinking they could stay under water longer by biting fart bubbles.

#1.
Christmas Causes Suicide

Christmas: A season of joy and togetherness and shopping and joy and shopping. It might be true that Christmas has become really commercialized (as you might have heard from Charlie Brown once or twice), but people generally seem to enjoy it. Aside from the stress, and family you hate, the travel and the junk lying around the house, of course. And the music.

Actually, when we hear that suicide rates jump during the holidays, it's easy to believe it. Especially if you've ever spent a Christmas drunk and alone, tearing up as you sit in your apartment and watch your favorite Christmas movie from childhood (Die Hard).

Why Is It a Load of Crap?

Actually, the suicide rate goes down significantly. Why?

While it's depressing as hell to be alone on Christmas, the truth is most of us aren't. It's just hard to commit suicide when there's people around constantly trying to get you to wear ugly sweaters. Depressed or not, most people aren't big enough dicks to let the kiddies find them hanging over the Christmas tree with a note pinned to their chest.

Who Started It?

In this case, no one fooled us more than ourselves. It's what they call confirmation bias; we decide ahead of time that people should get depressed over the holidays, so when we hear somebody killed themselves on Christmas, we assume the holiday was the reason.

Never mind that far more people kill themselves on President's day, and most other lesser holidays. Never mind that there could have been a thousand other reasons to be depressed.

Who Was Fooled?

The movie Gremlins, for one. A character quotes the suicide stat, which is one of several scientific inaccuracies we noticed in that film (see swimming after eating).

But also, just about every newspaper in the country tends to climb on board. Studies indicate that newspapers actually emphasize suicides during the holidays over the rest of the year, again assuming a link between the suicide and the holiday when they didn't even know if the victim recognized that it was the holiday at all.

In the general population, whether or not you believe this stat tends to depend on how much you hate Christmas (see this typical response from a ray of sunshine talking about how it's "no wonder" suicide rates go up that time of year).

For some reason, when we're miserable we like to project it on other people, and assume they're all miserable too. And, if thinking that other people are suicidal makes you feel a little less suicidal yourself, then go for it