backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 41 comment(s) - last by William Gaatje.. on Nov 3 at 1:36 PM
NASA aiming to learn more about long-term radiation exposure

To gather more information about space radiation, NASA plans to increase its testing of monkeys, according to a report published by Discovery News.

The U.S. space agency previously used lab mice and rats to test radiation, but testing must be carried out on animals more similar to humans.

“We realized there was a need for this kind of work,” Harvard Medical School behavior pharmacologist Jack Bergman told Discovery.  “There’s a long-standing commitment on the part of NASA to deep space travel and with that commitment comes a need for knowing what kinds of adverse effects deep space travel might have, what are the risks to astronauts.  That’s not been well assessed.”

Researchers are especially interested in long-term radiation exposure and how it alters the central nervous system of the monkeys.  NASA has sent monkeys into space before, but is this time interested in exposing them to low doses of radiation -- in an effort to better understand what could happen to astronauts if sent towards Mars.

Researchers from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory are now using squirrel monkeys trained to carry out a handful of behavioral tasks.  The squirrel monkeys will then be exposed to varying levels of radiation to see at what level performance is hindered, with researchers starting out with low doses.

Specifically, they'll be able to monitor both immediate effects and long-term effects from the radiation exposure.  After the monkeys are no longer being tested, they'll remain at the McLean Hospital, where they will not be killed.

Although dogs, monkeys and other small animals are used for biomedical testing, a large controversy related to their use remains an issue.  It appears NASA is doing everything in its power to make sure the lab monkeys will be taken care of, but it's possible animal rights groups will let their voices be heard regarding the testing.

Comments     Threshold


What do they expect?
By drycrust on 10/30/2009 2:10:18 PM , Rating: 1
Years ago I worked with a guy who was into animal rights and lobbied against unnecessary testing of animals. He would say things like, "If you spray oven cleaner into an animals eyes, what do you expect to happen? You'd expect the animal to go blind. So why do you need to do the test?"
While I don't agree with some of the things he'd say, he does have a point: After 70 years of nuclear industry, we know that nuclear radiation kills and shortens life. So why do they need to do this test?
Doesn't NASA employ "Rocket Scientists"? One of the things Rocket Scientists have to be able to do is model how a space craft will fly through space, but then they can't model the effects of radiation upon monkeys / people. What we get is "we have to do this because we don't know blah blah blah". Why not go and study the people around Chernobyl or one of the famous 1950s nuclear plants where radiation was spread around the local population like pollen in springtime. You don't need to be a Rocket Scientist to know there were lots of still born babies, leukaemias, people dying of unusual cancers, etc.
To me, even if the scientists did model the effects they expected prior to conducting the tests, the results are probably meaningless because the concentration of luekemias, etc, near nuclear plants proves that often the effects on, say, 95% of the population are insignificant, but that for those outside the standard deviation the results are significant, so unless they have like 100,000 monkeys this will be just a waste of a monkeys life because there is a 90% chance each monkey is within the standard deviation of nuclear radiation tolerance, and scientists should be interested in the 5% who are weak; because besides the millions of people who were radiated willy nilly we also have millions of people that are exposed to carefully measured radiation levels (e.g. via medical treatments), so we can see not just what effect known radiation exposure has on the human nervous system, but also how the same level affects different people; because we already have people who live for long periods in space, so we can study their nervous systems and should be able to develop models of likely effects; because there isn't any guarantee the monkeys nervous system is the same as ours; and because monkeys can escape, and the idea of having an angry monkey on the loose in the ISS wouldn't be a laughing matter.




RE: What do they expect?
By randomly on 10/30/2009 2:47:11 PM , Rating: 5
The goal is try to get an understanding of how biological organisms and people would respond to exposure from the Galactic Cosmic Ray (GCR) background.

GCR is not like any terrestrial radiation. GCR is mostly heavy atomic nuclei (like iron) at enormous energy levels (in the billion to 100 billion electron volt range). These energy levels are orders of magnitude higher than any radioactive decay or fission based source of radiation. These are very difficult to shield against, they are so penetrating that to be effective shielding needs to be literally Meters thick.

Information from normal nuclear radiation type exposure doesn't help with GCR. GCR particles leave long trails of destruction through biological organisms, initial impacts with atomic nuclei generate huge showers of secondary particles which generate even more secondary showers.

GCR radiation is currently one of the unsolved problems for deep space travel and it needs to be addressed before astronauts can go to mars are much anywhere else for extended periods of time(>200 days)without suffering unacceptably high amounts of damage that is either debilitating or fatal.

Fortunately for people on earth (and astronauts on the ISS) the earth's magnetic field deflects most of the GCR, and our atmosphere helps considerably also. This means that you can't really do GCR research on the ISS because it's already shielded by the earth's magnetic field.

The complexity of the interaction and effects on biological systems means there is no way to know if any computer simulation has any accuracy or validity. It's also hard to generate even simulated GCR type radiation on earth because of the high energy levels, the broad spectrum, and the wide range of particles. To get really accurate information you'll need to do long term exposures of animals and humans in spacecraft outside the Van Allen belts. It's a difficult problem to even analyze.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 10/31/2009 5:47:15 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
The goal is try to get an understanding of how biological organisms and people would respond to exposure from the Galactic Cosmic Ray (GCR) background.


My opinion is that life will happen.

The cambrian explosion was a combination of many factors.
One of the factors was prior before the cambrian explosion
The weakening of the earth magnetic field.
Another factor is that a burst of intensely high cosmic rays for a period of time during the period of the weakened magnetic field. This and the influence of the sun created havoc and life at the same time.

So yes, it is predictable what will happen.
When you want to go in outer space, make sure you have a very strong magnetic field surround your vessel. Or you will not live that long. The only reason life on the earth survived is by sheer numbers. For every mammal, a trillion times more bacteria and viruses can be found.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 10/31/2009 5:52:49 AM , Rating: 1
Another option but less likely is to build a vessel filled with liquid like water. I will bet water has some interesting properties. Especially when you pollute it a little to create electrical conductivity. I have always wondered what would happen if a strong magnetic field is applied to salt water. This water flows in currents. Therefore in the water itself electrical currents will start to flow. At least , that makes sense to me.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 10/31/2009 6:04:30 AM , Rating: 2
RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 10/31/2009 6:08:15 AM , Rating: 2
Mutagen = diversity of life.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 10/31/2009 6:14:42 AM , Rating: 2
Cosmic rays act as a mutagen = diversity of life.
Combine that with the properties of virus and bacteria to help out a little(horizontal gene transfer).
A lot of time and you get a lot of new species.
Afcourse a lot of death will happen too.

It is no coincidence that life was able to develop way deep in the sea. The salty sea water is a good protective shield. The deeper you get , the more shielded you are.
Electrical currents cause magnetic fields.


RE: What do they expect?
By randomly on 10/31/2009 11:33:49 PM , Rating: 4
The research goal is short and long term effects and survival of astronauts exposed to the GCR background radiation.

It's not about evolution through mutation, it's about finding out what are acceptable exposure limits and what treatments and drugs such as antioxidants etc. that might work to ameliorate the effects of the radiation and keep astronauts alive and healthy.

Knowing those limits will allow us to design appropriate passive and active shielding for a given mission profile that will give acceptable health risks. You can't just use a brute force approach such as an enormous magnetic field to give you equivalent shielding to the earth's magnetic field since the size, weight, and power consumption of such a magnet would be prohibitive in a spacecraft. We need to know how little shielding will be acceptable.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/1/2009 3:23:22 AM , Rating: 1
I totally understand that it has to be cost effective, because that is the magical word in our current illusion called economy. However, when really going into space, man needs a different attitude. Do it properly , or do it not. There is no half way 20/80 rule in space. Space is extremely hostile. It is not just that the earth magnetic field protects us, the sun shields us as well with it's enormous and continuous solarwind. We have jupiter as another 1st line of defense against meteorites that for obvious reasons do not get blocked by the heliosphere. The sun protects our solarsystem through the heliospehre. The earth magnetic field protects us from the solarwind and occasional bursts of cosmic rays.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliosphere

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/09101...

Imagine flying to a region that is one big particle accelerator. Al though i understand that we are not going to leave the solarsystem any time soon, caution is advised. I am sure that building a magnetic field proportional in strength to size when looking at the earth and a spacecraft, it is not really a big issue. It does not have to span give or take 30.000 kilometers.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/1/2009 3:43:51 AM , Rating: 1
You see, we are not build for harsh environments.
Even insects with there protective exoskeleton die almost immediately from radiation.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2006/02/23/...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13760-insect...


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/1/2009 3:51:17 AM , Rating: 2
I forgot to add that the electromagnetic spectrum is very large and that in these tests only a small range of the spectrum is used. I would not be surprised if the spectrum of the radiation would be a bit larger in space and more fluctuating causing strange unseen effects.


RE: What do they expect?
By randomly on 11/1/2009 8:36:08 AM , Rating: 2
The problem stems from the fact that the smaller the magnetic field the stronger it needs to be to deflect particles in the 1-100 GeV range. To get a magnetic field that will effectively shield a spaceship requires a very high field intensity AND a large enough field. Early estimates for a Superconducting magnet using current technology for a spacecraft come in at around 1600 metric tons, or 3.5 million pounds. This does not include the substantial power supply to run the magnet and cryogenics.

This is not an economically feasible option in this century and if you can't afford it you can't do it. The goal is to allow humans to travel to Mars, NEOs, asteroids, etc. in the near term.

Some organisms handle radiation much better than others. Deinococcus radiodurans for example can withstand more than 500 times the radiation dose that would be lethal to humans without significant effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodura...
Understanding how radiation resistant mechanisms work in biological systems is important.

"Do it properly , or do it not. There is no half way 20/80 rule in space. "

This is just glib nonsense.

What is your definition of 'properly' in this context? Everything about engineering spacecraft is a series of trade-offs between a huge number of factors including risk, reliability, weight, and cost. There is no one right answer. This is about knowing what the risks are and making acceptable compromises within the specific mission goals.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
- H.L. Mencken


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/1/2009 4:56:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Some organisms handle radiation much better than others. Deinococcus radiodurans for example can withstand more than 500 times the radiation dose that would be lethal to humans without significant effect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodura... Understanding how radiation resistant mechanisms work in biological systems is important.


I find it hard to believe that humans in that specific part of science do not know the effects of radiation. And from the bacteria i know, it was in my link.
But that is also the issue. What that bacteria can do, we cannot. That is have multiple copies of our dna present in a single cell. To repair the dna damage the multiple copies are used. That and the fact that that bacteria is much simpler then we are. Be real.

The only reason we could do it is by shedding cells faster , that is do apoptosis faster. But then we must also replace these defect cells with fresh cells faster. That means we have to burn through our metabolic rate like crazy. Highly unlikely that this can be performed faster then today with any side effects. Cause you age more quickly then because of the telomeres at then end of chromosomes and because of free radicals. In effect burning through your not infinite supply of cells. You exchange 1 problem with another. The only other way is through genetic engineering to make people more resilient to radiation. And that is something that for the time being we will only find in science fiction stories. I do find it interesting though, Having the features that that bacteria has, you would in essence alsmost be immortal. You can still die but not that easy.

quote:
"Do it properly , or do it not. There is no half way 20/80 rule in space. " This is just glib nonsense. What is your definition of 'properly' in this context ? Everything about engineering spacecraft is a series of trade-offs between a huge number of factors including risk, reliability, weight, and cost. There is no one right answer. This is about knowing what the risks are and making acceptable compromises within the specific mission goals. "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." - H.L. Mencken


I know there are trade offs. But i say experiment with fields. You see, you do not need the strength of the earth magnetic field. And to be serious, it is really not that strong in space, it is just big. At the core it is immensely strong but out there high above very weakened but still potent enough to protect us.

No brute force, i propose the following :
If you would do it the smart way, you would use layered weaker fields, In essence you make the particles
respond in 1 way, then you add another field that forces them in another way. If you do it right with the right combination of electrical and magnetic fields, you can drain the particles of their high energies until they are low enough to be stopped by conventional materials. What needs to be done is doing research to panels that like solar panels absorb these particle and release energy that is appropriate to use : Electrical. You must weaken the cosmic rays which in essence are high speed protons, you lower their energy and then you capture them using their energy. That is the idea. There is no brute force needed.
I am sure buckyballs and carbon nanotubes doped the right way can help accomplish this task. A lot of this research is readably available at the physics departments. The people who do electrostatic confinement theories will know what to do for 1 part.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_electrostati...

There is now a lot of solar energy research being done.
But more commonly known and researched is the photoelectric effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/1/2009 5:27:32 PM , Rating: 2
ANother idea that just popped in my mind : you could make the outer hall 1 big fusion reactor. Guide the reaction to the way you want and you should have propulsion as well. Add to that that you could scoop interstellar material (mostly hydrogen gas)as well and you do not even have to lower the energy of the cosmic rays that much come to think of it. You use the cosmic rays to start the fusion reaction. I mean, cosmic rays as is solar wind are nothing more then accelerated particles. Use the energy i say.
That way you do not even have to use or devise solar panel like panels. You wait for the first coronal mass ejection or set of cosmic rays to start up your fusion reaction and then your good to go. Propulsion and energy to power internal devices and life support and protection from nasty radiation and high energy particles. What else do you want more. We have the technology readably available. The problem is it is all spread in very different fields. And you know some scientists, they really want that nobelprize so much , they will not work together. To sad, so bad...


RE: What do they expect?
By randomly on 11/2/2009 11:11:36 AM , Rating: 2
These are all ludicrous ideas.

You are confusing interstellar hydrogen, with solar wind protons, and cosmic rays. They are not the same things. Your comments on using the cosmic rays to start a fusion reactor demonstrate a lack of even a basic understanding of the energies and physics involved.

Please refrain from speculating in this field until you obtain at least a minimal understanding of the physics involved so you can identify the flaws in your own ideas.

It will save everybody time. Let those who understand the physics come up with the ideas.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/2/2009 12:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
I am not confusing anything, look it up. The base material is the same which is hydrogen nuclei.

quote:
The solar wind is a stream of charged particles ejected from the upper atmosphere of the sun. It consists mostly of electrons and protons with energies of about 1 keV.


quote:
The most common isotope of hydrogen is protium (name rarely used, symbol H) with a single proton and no neutrons.


quote:
Cosmic rays are energetic particles originating from outer space that impinge on Earth's atmosphere. Almost 90% of all the incoming cosmic ray particles are protons , almost 10% are helium nuclei (alpha particles), and slightly under 1% are heavier elements and electrons (beta minus particles).[


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_wind

Assuming that the research done and the articles is correct it seems to me there is not that much different.
Now i will not dispute that all have very different energies but that should not be an unsolvable problem.
What i am saying is the energy is there, find a way to use it. There is an almost perfect vacuum out there, for starters.
Afcourse it is not all readably available , or mankind would have already mastered it. Besides, you just go ahead and search for your magical gene therapy cure. It will not happen for a long while. Everything that will happen is predictable and easy to understand if you know your physics and know how the body works. Think about what radiation can do to the common bacteria that surround your skin and live inside you. But i guess you want to give people a dose of Deinococcus radiodurans, i wonder what would happen though, i will give you that. But to be honest i would never execute such an experiment, not on myself or anybody else.


RE: What do they expect?
By randomly on 11/3/2009 9:42:41 AM , Rating: 2
I don't need to look it up. I'm familiar with the subject.

Hydrogen is an uncharged atom and thus essentially unaffected by magnetic fields.

Solar wind particles are low energy charged particles (protons and electrons) and easily shielded against. Not a major concern.

Solar Protons from Solar Proton Events and Coronal Mass Ejections are charged particles and are affected by electric and magnetic fields. They have energies up to the 10's of MeV usually. They are a major radiation hazard but it is quite feasible to passively shield against them.

Cosmic Rays are fully ionized atomic nuclei at extremely high energies (majority are in the range 0.1-10 GeV). Although 89% are protons, the vast majority of the radiation damage is done by the heavier nuclei, particularly iron, and these are the particles of concern. To passively shield against them takes shielding many meters thick.

The difference between these types of particles is profound. It's like saying that both radio waves and X-rays are electromagnetic waves therefore the piece of aluminum foil that blocks the signal to my cell phone is going to be equally effective against a multi megawatt X-ray laser.

Obviously you have no clear concept of what is involved. You suggest harvesting the energy, yet there is almost no energy to harvest. The individual particles have extremely high energies and are very destructive, but they are sparse. In absolute energy there is almost none to be had. You could get more energy out of a watch battery.
It would take many orders of magnitude more energy to manipulate cosmic rays than the energy they contain.

My point about Deinococcus Radiodurans is that biological organism have a very wide range of tolerances to radiation. The mechanisms of damage and repair and tolerance are varied, numerous, and complex. Is the powerful mechanism employed by DR applicable to humans? perhaps not, but there are many mechanisms that are such as free radical scavengers, immune system modification and sensitizing to deal with damaged cells etc. etc.

In all these fields there are smart people that have done extensive research and there are no obvious solutions that members of the general public are going to come up with that haven't already been proposed and analyzed.

Please do more reading and less speculation in areas beyond your knowledge base.


RE: What do they expect?
By William Gaatjes on 11/3/2009 1:36:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Obviously you have no clear concept of what is involved.


Fortunately i do :). I just like being creative, and every time i digg into interesting subjects i always find something nice. It's my nature. Besides, part of what i know comes from people who have a lifetime experience of physics knowledge. The other part is education and just interest and a pitbull nature to bite through difficult subjects. And afcourse i always question common knowledge. And that is a good thing.

quote:
The difference between these types of particles is profound. It's like saying that both radio waves and X-rays are electromagnetic waves therefore the piece of aluminum foil that blocks the signal to my cell phone is going to be equally effective against a multi megawatt X-ray laser.


I think i mentioned something in my other post about energy levels. Your futile attempt to explain is just that, futile.

Anyway we will see, in the end a lot of money is spend on results that are to be expected.

quote:
My point about Deinococcus Radiodurans is that biological organism have a very wide range of tolerances to radiation. The mechanisms of damage and repair and tolerance are varied, numerous, and complex. Is the powerful mechanism employed by DR applicable to humans? perhaps not, but there are many mechanisms that are such as free radical scavengers, immune system modification and sensitizing to deal with damaged cells etc. etc.


You watch to much startrek.
It's not like you use some syringe with a magical cure that can fix radiation damage.

The healthy human body is a strict balance of breakdown and
replenishment of cells. Some supervisual damage can be repaired. But without genetic engineering the human body has no natural defense against continuous radiation or very high power bursts. You cannot just specifically target a tumor in someone when part of his/hers body just shuts down because i doubt that just specific regions are damaged. And that is my concern. You do not just get skin ulcers, you literally fall apart. Bit difficult to get those medicines at the parts of your body where it is needed. There is so much to deal with. And on the other hand, if it is a slow progressing form of cancer, you will not know that you have a tumor until it is large enough to be discovered. That means non stop health checking. And how are you going to that ? Use your portable xray, CT, MRI or PET scanner ?

Believe me, on the short and long term, nasa is better off spending money by using the physics knowledge to create what is needed. Be prepared to do a lot of stemcell research and cloning of stemcells. In all honesty i find stemcell research very important, but way up there i think simulating a safe environment is the proper course to take.

Humanity is just starting to understand how dna actually works. Even when you have the complete program code, it does not mean that you know how it works. Because a very large part of our dna is dynamically executed. Knock out mice and larger animals are one thing. A human being is something else. And think about that you live in symbiosis with the bacteria surrounding your body and inside your body. These bacteria mutate will have a feast on you if they would develop in something nasty.


RE: What do they expect?
By JonB on 10/30/2009 4:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
While I don't agree with some of the things he'd say, he does have a point: After 70 years of nuclear industry, we know that nuclear radiation kills and shortens life. So why do they need to do this test?


You are talking about the difference between Apples and Pears! In the 70 years of the nuclear industry, they have done everything they can to get radiation doses low, low, low. The legal limit by NRC regulation is 5 REM per year and it is rare for anyone to get close to that. And if they do, it is in one large exposure, not continuous. (the difference between "chronic" and "acute" exposure)

Space travelers will get "chronic" exposure of a fairly high level, even if they build in a lot of shielding to some parts of the vessel. We don't know about that kind of dose and quantity. Not only will you be exposed to solar radiation but to the kind of cosmic radiation that the Earth is shielded from by the solar wind. Mars does not have the same shield because it doesn't have a strong magnetic field, so the radiation dose will just keep coming and coming and coming (unless you go underground).


Good Idea
By AssBall on 10/30/2009 10:34:50 AM , Rating: 5
They should do the radiation research on PETA members instead of those poor, innocent monkeys.




RE: Good Idea
By kattanna on 10/30/2009 11:43:26 AM , Rating: 5
i couldnt possibly agree more, but there might be a problem with that

quote:
but testing must be carried out on animals more similar to humans


with that, im sure the apes are more similar to humans then PETA members, so that might be a deal breaker. but i say we try anyways

:>)


RE: Good Idea
By lightfoot on 10/30/2009 4:03:44 PM , Rating: 3
That's why you start with PETA members first, and once the major risks have been ruled out you then move on to mice and rats, then small primates, then apes and eventually humans.

I've always wondered about products that claimed that they "were not tested on Animals." Does that mean that the product was tested on humans, or simply was never tested?


RE: Good Idea
By JediJeb on 10/30/2009 4:52:28 PM , Rating: 2
And here I always though PETA stood for People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.


Project X
By SiliconJon on 10/30/2009 9:12:39 AM , Rating: 2
Don't let Matthew Broderick or Helen Hunt in there!




RE: Project X
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/30/2009 9:16:13 AM , Rating: 3
Oh man, that was one of my favorite movies growing up as a kid. Virgil was a pimp :-)


RE: Project X
By bubba551 on 10/30/2009 9:29:27 AM , Rating: 2
Darn! You beat me to it!


RE: Project X
By marvdmartian on 10/30/2009 11:52:22 AM , Rating: 2
Pssshhhhh.......you won't end up with hyper intelligent monkeys by nuking them in a microwave......but since atomic bombs dropped on Japan created Godzilla, we might just find out how King Kong came about!


RE: Project X
By SiliconJon on 10/30/2009 2:15:40 PM , Rating: 2
LOL, they updated the picture! I win a prize! O_o


Why use chimps????
By hosps on 10/30/2009 1:26:16 PM , Rating: 4
It is unbelievable with the this nations unemployment rate we currently have that we are willing to offer these jobs to chimps. Doesn't seem like a smart move for a government organization to be outsourcing this work.

We have plenty of qualified people here in the states that can do this. There are those out of work from the Bush administration that need jobs. Cheney sounds like a chimp and Bush looks like one (but a bit of a stretch intellectually). Use them!




RE: Why use chimps????
By choadenstein on 10/30/2009 2:19:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is unbelievable with the this nations unemployment rate we currently have that we are willing to offer these jobs to chimps. Doesn't seem like a smart move for a government organization to be outsourcing this work.


THEY TOOK OUR JOBS!!!! DEY DERK R DERBS!!!


RE: Why use chimps????
By WayneG on 10/30/2009 4:43:33 PM , Rating: 2
DERPA BUR


RE: Why use chimps????
By Jedi2155 on 10/31/2009 10:23:42 PM , Rating: 2
DURKA DURKA MOHAMMED JIHAD


I hope...
By EBH on 10/30/2009 12:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
by apes they a refering to all the inmates locked up in prison that continue to waste our taxdollars.




RE: I hope...
By Joepublic2 on 10/31/2009 4:52:09 AM , Rating: 2
why stop at prisons? for maximal tax savings I say merge the judicial and legislative branch a la judge dredd, record the footage with helmet cams and sell it. then people like you can beat off to that instead of funding the snuff film black market and the cops can use the cash to buy more ammo for additional tax savings.


RE: I hope...
By Joepublic2 on 10/31/2009 4:54:57 AM , Rating: 2
that's judicial and executive although it would most efficient if the cops/judges could just write retroactively applicable laws on the fly now that i think about it.


Can't help but think of this
By AlexWade on 10/30/2009 9:36:15 AM , Rating: 2
You're kidding, right?
By HoundRogerson on 10/30/2009 10:25:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It appears NASA is doing everything in its power to make sure the lab monkeys will be taken care of, but it's possible animal rights groups will let their voices be heard regarding the testing.


POSSIBLE??!?!? Dude, the groups in America alone are gonna go apeshit over this, no pun intended.




Scientists are playing with fire
By borowki2 on 10/30/2009 1:32:53 PM , Rating: 2
What if the radiation turns the subject turned into the monkey torch?




hairless apes?
By niva on 10/30/2009 9:27:57 PM , Rating: 2
Hairless monkeys are cute.




They're going to do radiation testing on Obama?
By Rob94hawk on 10/31/09, Rating: 0
By MamiyaOtaru on 10/31/2009 4:46:35 PM , Rating: 2
holy **** a living anachronism


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki