90% True

.: A somewhat recent development: whenever somebody does something that affects me in less than desirable ways, I become understandably hurt, enraged, annoyed, or sad for a few minutes. Then, I imagine how the scenario might appear to an outside observer as if it were happening in a story, and I almost always laugh. I’m pretty sure it’s a coping mechanism, but I’m wondering if anyone else has experienced the same thing.

.: It’s becoming difficult to separate how I react when something bad happens to someone else from how I react when something bad happens to me. Nobody wants to be that guy after he falls and hurts himself on a comically misplaced rake. Nobody wants to be that guy after his computer crashes before he saves his final paper. Nobody wants to be that guy after his roommate sells his drum set without telling him. But everybody laughs at that guy, because all of those scenarios are funny.

.: And yet these kind of things happen to me, and they’re becoming difficult to deal with because I find them so damn hilarious. I carry around a moleskine in which I write down all sorts of bad things which happen to me. I tell myself I’m going to use these occurrences for stories in the future, but I hardly ever get around to writing them. It’s almost as if imagining them in stories is enough to satisfy whatever feeling I have that needs satisfying.

(view larger)

.: You might think this cannot possibly work, but I have a standing offer of $100 to drink a six-pack of beer of my choice.

.: My Cell Physiology professor is retiring this semester, and as a treat to his class he wheeled in a bookshelf containing every textbook in his library and let us pinch whatever we wanted. One lucky bastard snagged the 7th edition of Campbell and Reece’s Biology, but most everything else was out of date. I waited for the feeding frenzy to clear, and when it did there were only a few items left: a human physiology study guide companion, three statistical analysis manuals, and one fantastically bizarre pamphlet on fasting written by none other than Jerry Falwell:

.: It’s 55 pages long, held together by two staples, and just the shade of yellow you’d expect from a 24 year old booklet. It looks as if upwards to three days of work were put into making this thing. The pages naturally fall open to chapter three: How To Fast. Amazingly, five pages follow explaining exactly that.

.: If you can’t read the text in the image above, it says:

In this helpful study of the biblical and historical role of fasting, Dr. Jerry Falwell offers sound, practical advice on this often neglected topic.

He explores the types and occasions of biblical fasting, discusses the meaning of this practice for Christians today, and gives detailed instructions on how to receive the greatest benefit from prayerful fasting.

A must manual for churches and individuals who see a need for sincere discipline in all areas of the Christian life in these days of national and international crisis.

.: Already my devious mind began spinning. I must warn the reader now that what comes next is juvenile humor at its basest form, a puerile assault upon the senses and wholly without worth in terms of both quality and taste. Nevertheless, I wish to share with you my shenanigans because I find them really, really funny.

.: It occurred to me that a simple substitution of the “s” for an “r” transformed what was already a ridiculous work of bogus biblical therapy into the funniest twenty minutes of reading I’ve ever had the pleasure of creating. Thus the opening line of the introduction,

During the past several years fasting has become a popular form of protest.

…becomes

During the past several years farting has become a popular form of protest.

.: It doesn’t stop there. Almost the entire book can handle the switch and still work with its context:

Many people in the Bible farted. Moses farted on Mount Sinai (Exodus 34:28). Hannah farted when she wanted a son from God (1 Samuel 1:7). David farted on several occasions (2 Samuel 1:12; 12:22). The entire Israelite nation farted on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 23:27a).

But farting is not just an Old Testament practice. Jesus farted in the wilderness (Matthew 4:2). John the Baptist taught his disciples to fart frequently (Mark 2:18; Luke 5:33). Some found fault with Jesus’ disciples for their failure to fart often (Matthew 9:14, 15; Mark 2:18, 19; Luke 5:33-35).

.: It became a game for a friend and me to find the passage best served by the transposition. Several strong contenders were isolated and duly corrected:

• Throughout history, great men sought the power and blessing of God while farting. Luther, Calvin, and Knox farted. Jonathan Edwards farted for twenty-two hours prior to preaching his famous sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.”
• Momentous decisions must be made in the 1980s, a decade of destiny. Revival must come to America. Because of this, I have called America to join me in a great fart.
• Some have mistakenly said that we should not preach about farting. They quote the Scriptures where Jesus commanded that we should not boast about our farting. “Moreover when ye fart, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fart.
• We must fart continually for America
• Some women’s magazines have suggested farting for dieting. Others have advocated farting for physical benefits. A few people have done fanatical things when they farted.
• There are certain dangers associated with farting. Perhaps this is the reason why no explicit commands regarding the optimum occasion and the length of a fart are found in the Bible.
• A fourth danger of farting occurs when people try to equate spirituality with farting. Some people want everyone to fart exactly the way they fart.

.: As is the case with everything lowbrow, it can be difficult to know when to stop. My friend Hunter once exclaimed to me that farts will always be funny. When I asked him why he believed this to be so, he answered, “Because it’s the sound of your ass cheeks flapping against each other thousands of times per second.” I have since analyzed his reasoning from every conceivable angle and have found it devoid of any flaws.

.: I feel fortunate to have stumbled across this gem before anyone else, because, really, the joke is obvious to anyone with an appropriately stunted mind. Before I go, I feel it is my duty to reference prior art:

.: When, for the “Favorite TV shows” section of your facebook profile, you write:

Television is the epitome of Plato’s cave. It is a shadow machine, a device directly connected with the bottom half of the divided line. Get out of the cave and stop watching TV.

…and then include in your subsequent list of favorite movies both the Back to the Future trilogy and Star Wars, you make me giggle.

.: I read the opinion page of the Waco Tribune-Herald religiously. I’ve written several letters to editor, usually responding to some clueless creationist’s bogus claims, so I’m always on the lookout for my name (should it appear). Today’s letters to the editor contained a response to the following editorial, which I reproduce in its entirety before it disappears from the internet:

Editorial: Specious claims by abortion foes

We wish we could tell motorists to ignore a certain billboard on Franklin Avenue. That’s impossible, so we’ll point out why it should be ignored.

The billboard, purchased by opponents of legal abortion, asserts two specious linkages. First, it links abortion to breast cancer. Though advocates produce studies raising that concern, it is not shared by the American Cancer Society. Indeed, the society calls the claim false.

The billboard also implies that funds raised by the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure go to abortions.

False as well.

The relationship between Komen and Planned Parenthood is about detecting breast cancer through screenings and referrals — among a plethora of services Planned Parenthood offers for women in Central Texas.

Those are the facts for which the billboard has no room.

.: Karen Malec, of Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, could not remain content with such sensible words plaguing the prestigious pages of the Waco Tribune-Herald. Apparently wishing to balance the sense/nonsense ratio with her own contribution, she issued forth a volley of falsehoods and fallacies.

.: Let’s start with her first claim: “Cancer groups admit that childbearing helps protect women against breast cancer.” Okay — that’s reasonable and supported by enough studies that I don’t even have to link to them. It’s a non-controversial point accepted by everybody. But we’re talking about abortion, not childbearing. What does the contentious billboard actually say?

“What? An abortion increases my risk for breast cancer? Why does the Komen Race grant $45,000 to Waco’s Planned Parenthood abortion provider?”

.: Sounds to me like they’re claiming the act of having abortion is what causes breast cancer. That’s a pretty reasonable interpretation of the sign, no? Malec follows her opening salvo with this quote plucked from an American Cancer Society press release:

“Much of the long-term underlying increase in incidence among women is due to historical changes in reproductive patterns, such as delayed childbearing and having fewer children.”

.: Delayed childbearing and having fewer children? That statement applies equally well to childless women who haven’t had an abortion. Take a look at the press release yourself. Hit Ctrl-F, search for “abortion”, and tell me what you find.

.: If the ACS’s quote about differences in reproductive patterns included abortion rates, they would’ve said so. The fact that they don’t is telling, and there’s a reason for that (more on that later). Malec continues her sleight of hand:

Childlessness and late first full-term pregnancy are known to increase breast cancer risk significantly. Nearly all of the childless woman’s breast lobules consist of immature, cancer-susceptible Type 1 and 2 lobules, where 95 percent of all breast cancers originate.

It is only during the last months of a first full-term pregnancy that 85 percent of the lobules mature into fully cancer-resistant Type 4 lobules.

Every subsequent full-term pregnancy results in an additional 10 percent reduction in breast cancer risk.

.: That’s all well and good — it may even be true — but what does that have to do with the physical act of getting an abortion? To say “Women who are childless and have had an abortion are at an increased risk for breast cancer” is just as true as saying “Women who are childless, have had an abortion, and wear red hats are at an increased risk for breast cancer.”

.: So continues Malec: “The American Cancer Society and Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure contradict themselves by denying a link between abortion and breast cancer.”

.: They contradict themselves only if you conflate “childlessness” with “having an abortion”. Luckily, the folks at the American Cancer Society are smarter than that. And it’s not just the ACS who understands the matter. Here’s the letter to the editor I cobbled together and sent a few hours ago (hyperlinks are added for convenience):

Karen Malec concludes her April 13th letter, “the childless woman who aborts her pregnancy has a greater risk than the one who has a baby.” Several studies state otherwise:

“Our results do not support the hypothesis that induced abortion or miscarriage increase the breast cancer risk of young women.” - Mahue-Giangreco M, et al, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003 Mar;12(3):209-14.

“It is concluded that there is no evidence linking abortion to the risk of breast cancer.” - Rosenberg L, et al, Am J Epidemiol. 1988 May;127(5):981-9.

“Pregnancies that end as a spontaneous or induced abortion do not increase a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer.” - Beral V, et al, Lancet. 2004 Mar 27;363(9414):1007-16.

“Overall, the findings provide further unbiased evidence of the lack of an adverse effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk.” - Reeves GK, et al, Int J Cancer. 2006 Oct 1;119(7):1741-5.

“This study does not support the hypothesis that spontaneous or induced abortion appreciably influences subsequent breast-cancer risk.” - Parazzini F, et al, Int J Cancer. 1991 Jul 30;48(6):816-20.

“These findings do not support an association between spontaneous abortion and fatal breast cancer.” - Calle EE, et al, Cancer Causes Control. 1995 Sep;6(5):460-8.

“These data do not support the hypothesis that miscarriage or induced abortion represent substantive risk factors for the future development of breast cancer.” - Brewster DH, et al, J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005 Apr;59(4):283-7.

“In conclusion, neither a history of induced nor spontaneous abortions is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.” - Erlandsson G, et al, Int J Cancer. 2003 Feb 20;103(5):676-9.

No doubt a space-conscious editor will cull several items from my list. For the record, I provided eight articles all stating the same thing: there is no evidence that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer.

.: Here’s Malec’s last line again: “If it’s true that childbearing protects women from breast cancer, then it’s self-evident that the childless woman who aborts her pregnancy has a greater risk than the one who has a baby.”

.: And here’s the same truth with all the extraneous, unsupported bits removed: “If it’s true that childbearing protects women from breast cancer, then it’s self-evident that the childless woman has a greater risk than the one who has a baby.”

.: Remember what the billboard said? “What? An abortion increases my risk for breast cancer?” I’m pleased to tell you, Anonymous Billboard Lady, that, no, an abortion does not increase your risk for breast cancer.

.: Unless you’re wearing a red hat.

.: It’s been a while since I promised part nine of my trip to Europe. Dedicated readers will recall I spent the early part of August first in London then in Paris. My meanderings in the former are well-documented; less so for the latter.

.: One nice habit I picked up during the French portion of the trip was note-taking. I wrote rough drafts of the London posts at night and uploaded final versions in the morning. In Paris, I bought a small moleskin pocketbook to keep record as things happened instead of trying to remember them all at once. It’s a practice I keep to this day, but it unfortunately reinforced my proclivity for not completing assignments after taking rudimentary notes.

.: I’ve burned through four moleskins since my August trip, and now we’ve just said our goodbyes to the beginning of April. When I searched my desk for a fresh pocketbook, I found the original that I hadn’t touched since France. Fancy struck and I decided to finally give my faithful readers at least a glimmer of what might have been had I continued the series in a more timely manner.

.: The only roadblocks are a limited memory and a confusing notation. I’m sure I could at one time understand a note that read “‘Frayed rope shaped like rollercoaster’ - Neal Stephenson,” but I’m afraid any ability to decipher this code has long since atrophied. I do hope you’ll forgive me for condensing a week-long excursion to a single post when I was able to tease out eight posts for an equally long interval in London.

.: I can only assume these notes were taken in chronological order, as I see no point for me to have written them haphazardly. Nevertheless, as there is no overarching narrative to which I need adhere, it makes no difference in which order I present them. Let’s start with some helpful advice:

Don’t look directly at the according players or they’ll make you pay.
.: Did you know if somebody pays attention to you when you perform music in a public place, you can be an obnoxious turd and demand money for your unsolicited services? Did you know if you don’t want to be hassled by no-talent subway gypsies you have to keep your gaze unflinchingly straight and never once let loose an expression that could be confused for enjoyment? If you didn’t, you might find yourself flustered, annoyed, and five Euros lighter.

Asking “Where are the toilets?” in French is useless.
.: Oscar taught me how to say Où sont les toilettes?, but he neglected to mention what deuxième niveau, trois salles de bas, sur la droite means. The kind employee who gave the directions probably expected me to leave upon receiving them, but I had no idea what he said. I sheepishly asked again in English, and he responded in kind. I suppose the gesture is not entirely useless. I hear the French are much friendlier when you at least attempt their language before you use English. To that end, a more apt translation for Où sont les toilettes? is “Okay, I tried.”

Lanes are democratic constructs.
.: Riding in cabs taught me interesting facts about Parisian culture. One is that French cabbies can and do both read and drive, and the other is that road lanes are one notch bellow suggestion, as ignorable as an elementary school hall monitor is to a trespassing middle schooler. I also looked forward to driving on the right side of the road once more, but nearly all streets in Paris are one-way, so the effect was lost.

“Pharamacie, where they sell drugs, and Parapharmacie, where they sell magic.”
.: Cheap, affordable health care awaits every citizen of France on nearly every street corner. Pointless, ineffective pseudoscience, on the other hand, awaits every citizen on every other street corner. I forget the logos which distinguish one from the other, but knowing the difference can help prevent you from purchasing overpriced sugar water.

“Fun Fact, Cody: this post office is privatized, so you can threaten to kill the employees and it won’t be a federal offense.”
.: Sometimes a knowledgeable guide is the most important thing to bring with you.

Indian music sounds like two songs competing for the same radio frequency.
.: This, I’m afraid, is a fact.

Wonderful view of the wing.
.: The flight home had me seated next to a window which for the duration of the flight overlooked the riveted steel wing of the aircraft. I mentioned this to Oscar, and he suggested instead of transparent windows they should just install “pull-down frowny faces.”

Holy water splashdown.
.: I’ve criticized religions before, but one response I often receive goes something like, “Why can’t you just leave other people’s beliefs alone if they aren’t harming anyone else?” One could reasonably ascribe holy water and other similar sacraments the status of harmless belief, but only if one’s baggage didn’t arrive before a large canister of holy water burst on the baggage claim conveyor.

Airport Customs - making rubber stamping come alive!
.: Oscar shared with me the secret for smuggling goods past customs agents: you lie. They asked questions and accepted any answer we gave them. No, I do not have any alcoholic beverages or illegal substances on me or my baggage, but oops! I accidentally carried over some unregistered livestock. Thank god you asked.

Wonderful service at IHOP.
.: Fresh off the plane, Oscar, his sister, and I went to an IHOP by the airport, where we ordered water, with ice, which was refilled whenever we ran low. It was the best service we’d had in two weeks.