Fireworks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
13 Jun 2011
Posts
6,014
Ban cats to being aloud outside one month per year infact ban cats altogether.

Fireworks should be aloud to be used at any time of the year to celebrate any occasion, ive been to weddings that have had evening fireworks for example. Its a temporary inconvenient and easily averted by having the tv louder windows shut etc etc.

Yes i hate cats
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Jul 2009
Posts
3,106
Location
Folkestone
Whats stopping someone stockpiling gunpowder for a few years ? Seems very stupid giving the public gunpowder. Have they not heard of Guy Fawkes :eek:
 
Associate
Joined
27 Oct 2003
Posts
2,391
My city has ~1500 temples, there are fireworks spanning a few hours literally every night, year round. Lots of firecrackers in the day too. It's always some god's birthday or a festival or something.

Dogs, cats and people all manage to survive this. Don't really see the harm. The incessant burning of paper money polluting the air annoys me no end, though.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Posts
12,702
Not too clued up on immunology I take it?

Lowered immune response has got absolutely nothing to do with "chance of infection". A body with no immune system whatsoever has exactly the same "chance of infection" as a body with the best immune system you can get.


It's got nothing do to with "chance" of infection. If an infectious agent is introduced to a host, the body is infected from that point onward - there is no chance of infection if you're already infected with something lmao.

An immune response is the body's mechanism of identifying and purging foreign infection which has entered already, it's not some magic force-field which stops a flu virus (for example) from ever coming into contact with your throat lmao.

A clinical definition of infection would include the proliferation of the pathogen towards causing a tangible set of symptoms and as we are talking about a quantifiable clinical outcome then that is the logical definition.

Moreover, if we were to use you strict interpretation then you would also be wrong because cortisol has a direct effect on the innate immune system consequently and directly impacting on the possibility of a pathogen entering the body.

So rather than be a smart ass you could realise that the biggest and most effective part of the immune system is a magic forcefield keeping pathogens at bay. It's called your skin.

Maybe shouldn't have gone all 'lmao'. Kind of made yourself look a bit silly (again).
 
Can't type for toffee
Don
Joined
14 Jun 2004
Posts
17,359
Location
Newcastle U/T
I have 2 cats, they both have a catflap they can come and go as they please.
They both simply come inside when there's fireworks.

The ones we bought at costco last year (fireworks not cats) seemed pretty damn good for the money so we'll be headed back there this year again I think :)
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Dec 2006
Posts
15,370
A clinical definition of infection would include the proliferation of the pathogen towards causing a tangible set of symptoms and as we are talking about a quantifiable clinical outcome then that is the logical definition.

What on earth? So you're basically saying that if someone gets the flu and it's thriving in their respiratory tract, but they don't show symptoms, such as fever, because they have an immunodeficiency of some sort, they simply don't have an infection?

Also, you're saying that because they don't show symptoms, no one has ever been infected by immunodeficiency virus??

Ahahahaha. Amazing.


Moreover, if we were to use you strict interpretation then you would also be wrong because cortisol has a direct effect on the innate immune system consequently and directly impacting on the possibility of a pathogen entering the body.

You really don't understand do you?

Cortisol released as a response to stressful situation may suppress the immune system yes, but how on earth does that directly impact the possibility of an infectious agent physically entering the body?

Are you saying that if someone is in a non-stressed state their earholes close, they don't touch their eyes, they stop breathing and swallowing, and they will never scratch their skin, all because no cortisol is being released?

Unbelievable.

Lets say we have two utterly healthy individuals, one is stressed and one is not.
I have the flu and I go and cough and sneeze my lungs out right in their faces.
You are telling me that the one who is stressed will suck up my flu particles and the one who isn't stressed will magically deflect them?

Bwahahahahahahahah :D:D:D:D

The answer is just no. Both of them will breathe normally, they will have their eyes open, and the virus will physically enter both their bodies.


So rather than be a smart ass you could realise that the biggest and most effective part of the immune system is a magic forcefield keeping pathogens at bay. It's called your skin.

Maybe shouldn't have gone all 'lmao'. Kind of made yourself look a bit silly (again).

Hahaha more wrongness and clutching at straws already. Skin is not a magic forcefield sorry and it is certainly not part of the immune system. Lets go back to your cortisol, so say someone is stressed out and a boatload of cortisol is being released, are you saying it will suppress my skin's immune response? Considering its the most "biggest and effective part of the immune system" Please explain the exact immunological response carried out by your skin when a flu virus (for example) is on your fingertip.

Skin does not keep "pathogens" "at bay". That is absolute nonsense. Skin does not neutralise anything lol, it's just a physical barrier. In fact skin ITSELF is susceptible to infections for goodness sake!!! Ever seen what herpes looks like?


I'm not being a smart arse, you're simply all over the place.

This is actually an interesting topic which I shall be discussing with some qualified people very shortly. Meanwhile, you can keep whining about how some cortisol will open up some extra orifices in your body and somehow start to suck in infections through them lmao.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Posts
12,702
The skin is a mechanical component of the innate immune system ... that's basic GCSE level biology.

I'll ignore the strawman waffle.

Edit: just a tip when you speak to your friends maybe they could maybe explain the difference between the innate and adaptive immune system and cortisol effects on Il-1
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
5 Dec 2006
Posts
15,370
The skin is a mechanical component of the innate immune system ... that's basic GCSE level biology.

I'll ignore the strawman waffle.

But you're not explaining anything whatsoever now.

You said this:
Moreover, if we were to use you strict interpretation then you would also be wrong because cortisol has a direct effect on the innate immune system consequently and directly impacting on the possibility of a pathogen entering the body.


I've explained to you that two people sitting down, one with zero immune system and one with the best immune system, fling some flu particles at them and the flu particles will enter their bodies in exactly the same fashion.

Sorry but you are absolutely and utterly wrong if you think immune systems stop physical items from "entering the body".


The more you talk the more nonsense you spout. Now you're talking as if someone with HIV will be able to absorb the flu though their hands. :D:D:D I cant stop laughing.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Posts
12,702
You need to read up on the difference between adaptive and innate immune systems then you will stop posting such inane dribble.

Edit; Here I'll do it for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innate_immune_system

Anatomical Barriers - it's quite clear like I said GCSE level biology.

Maybe you should stick to gangs and guns if science is too difficult for you?
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
5 Dec 2006
Posts
15,370
You need to read up on the difference between adaptive and innate immune systems then you will stop posting such inane dribble.

Can you just cut the crap and explain what that has to do with something "entering the body"? Or just man up and admit you don't have a clue and are here to make yourself look clever on the internet.

For the third time. Two people sitting next to each other. One doesn't have any immunity to anything whether it's "innate" or "adaptive" (lol) and one has an epic immune system both innate and adaptive which will destroy any and all bad infections. How does it stop something "entering the body" unless one of them isn't breathing and has had all their orifices plugged and sealed?

You think you have GCSE understanding of biology but you're just displaying a complete lack of understanding of even elementary physics. lmao. :D
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
5 Dec 2006
Posts
15,370
Maybe you should stick to gangs and guns if science is too difficult for you?

Yeah you're clearly not capable of explaining anything logically without resorting to silliness. If I want to learn science I will go to a biology professor or something, you've had far too many chances to explain yourself.

If I am ever able to understand how the immune system can stop things "entering the body" at the orifice ie, nostril, ears, eyes, mouth, anus etc, it certainly will be because of you, so I still thank you for your perseverance.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
5 Dec 2006
Posts
15,370
If you actually stopped posting rubbish and read that link above it explains it.
Yeah and you're not posting rubbish? you're jumping to gangs with mac10s before even attempting to answer a single question I have asked and the link you posted above pretty much confirms that two people sitting next to each other, one with a perfect immunity and one with HIV, the infectious agent will enter both through the SAME attack vector, the only difference is how the immune system will act AFTER it has already entered. You seem to think the immune system can somehow identify an infection from several metres away and then somehow cause the person to close his eyes or stop breathing or whatever to literally stop it entering the body, which quite frankly sounds absolutely absurd.

You still haven't explained the mechanism by which an immune system can distinguish a flu particle in a sample of air which is several metres away and stop it from being breathed in. :D

How does an immune system even identify the infection if it isn't entered into the body yet? Some sort of telekinesis?

I would rather speak to a biology professor, or at least a doctor. Because I've asked you about 30 questions and you haven't even tried to answer a SINGLE one :D
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom