Posted by Dave on Wed, 19 Dec 2012 23:46 | #

There’s possibly something similar going on with the “gay germ” theories, right?

Posted by Graham_Lister on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:46 | #

Fascinating paper - a bit hard to judge how significant (or not) the findings are without being a specialist in the particular field but still an interesting read.

Not sure it has any political implications. Bacteria do what bacteria do. As Mr. Haller has rightly suggested the globe is a much ‘smaller place’ today than anyone in say 1712 or 1812 could have ever imagined - that’s even allowing for a, counter-factually, non-multicult, non-mass migration world in 2012. Even under optimal conditions the world of 2012 would still be far more interconnected than the world of 1712.

However, without being too much of a ‘hard’ reductionist the brute truth is if one eats the typical American diet; basically not so much too high in fat but rather a high GI diet, with too many calories especially from ‘simple’ carbohydrates, that sadly we also embrace in the UK (why can’t we eat as well as the Italians or Spanish - both in terms of recipes, hospitality, manners etc.?) - and then add to that ‘American’ diet a total lack of exercise, then one will become a fat bastard very quickly and probably not a very healthy person - irrespective of any bacteria in one’s gut.

I noticed the name Ilana Mercer come up in another thread and how ‘everyone’ one the right likes her.

Forgive me I had to google the name - I don’t like very much what any libertarian has to say. But I’m not a liberal and I’m not on the right of liberalism. I guess I just move in very different intellectual waters and political circles. Now just where is my Verso catalogue?

Posted by DSCI on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 02:18 | #

Pastor Lindstedt calls Alex Linder a “gut-sick guido kiken-weasel with Crohns/jew ass-GAIDS.” Does this have anything to with this gut bacteria?

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:20 | #

G. “Lister” asserts: “As Mr. Haller has rightly suggested the globe is a much ‘smaller place’ today than anyone in say 1712 or 1812 could have ever imagined - that’s even allowing for a, counter-factually, non-multicult, non-mass migration world in 2012. Even under optimal conditions the world of 2012 would still be far more interconnected than the world of 1712.”

Amazing that your namesake’s confirmation of Pasteur’s theory of microbial infection came well within a lifetime of 1812. Equally amazing is that you would adopt the insane attitude toward international interconnection so single-mindedly pursued by “libertarians”—that “progress” in international economics is “inevitable” despite scientific evidence of organic risk externalities visited on organic nations which you say you are defending against “libertarians”.

Why adopt the libertarian posture only when it is most damaging to organic nations?

PS: If you want to see thoughts on this from a “libertarian” who is more rational than you—and who also happens to be a doctor—check out this post at The Daily Paul

Posted by Graham_Lister on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:17 | #

Mr. Bowery please dear boy do calm down.

If you like a ‘Man vs. Food’ style diet be my guest.

But really my comment about a smaller world is simply a fact. As an American I thought you might have appreciated that being in the ‘New World’ and all. I wonder why it was dubbed the ‘New World’ eh? Did the world become more or less interconnected with the adventures of Christopher Columbus et al.?

On a more common-sense basis one cannot uninvent the Boeing 747. Nor indeed the technology that allowed Columbus do to his thing back in the day etc. Technological and economic developments, no doubt, have a complex relationship but technological change does tend to have an aspect of cumulative optimisation over time. Invent something, learn how it succeeds and fails, iterate and do it better next time and so on. And technologies, like evermore efficient forms of transport and communication, do make the world more interconnected. Of course liberals wish to wrap these processes and present them in their own ideological and economic interests as a particular narrative called globalisation. But disentangling the myths from the facts, the ideology from the brute realities of ‘globalisation’ is a task that cannot be done in a brief paragraph or two.

Then again I am in dialogue with someone that ‘thinks’ deadly pairwise duels to be key political concept of this or any other age. Rationality Mr. Bowery? I doubt you could recognise it if were to bite you on your, in all probability, very large arse.

Then again as the saying goes; whose justice, whose rationality?

But seriously Mr. Bowery do you think the connectivity of the global could have remained as it was in say 452, or perhaps at 1066 (or whichever date you like) in perpetuity? You’re taking the piss if you say ‘yes’. And even if you were hypothetically correct on this issue, well guess what we are not in Kansas anymore Dorothy. We are where we are.

It’s no good giving the Irishman’s response to the question “how do I get to Tipperary?” with “Well you don’t want to start from here that’s for sure”.

P.S. Please don’t send me to sites where banal liberalism is thought to be the height of thought on the human condition or with regard to politics. I can read far more intellectually robust liberals from my bookshelf. Next you will be telling us again all about the wonders of ‘Sovereign Press’. Seemingly they are a key influence on your own thoughts.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sovereign_Press

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 06:58 | #

The “it was inevitable” argument is very powerful and general.  Indeed, who can argue with it?

How in the world could things have been any different?

The “counterfactual” is, indeed, counter to fact.

Now, having satisfied your sophistry, let me state simply that if there had been anything resembling prudent leadership at the time of Baron Lister’s 1867 British Medical Association’s presentation of antiseptic practice, the hubris of international transport of organic materials, including people, would have been seen for what it was:

A mortal threat to the organic nations of the world.

Oh, did I forget to call you “my dear girl”?  This omission clearly invalidates my prior point.  Please disregard this communication.

Posted by Morgan on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:32 | #

if there had been anything resembling prudent leadership at the time of Baron Lister’s 1867 British Medical Association’s presentation of antiseptic practice, the hubris of international transport of organic materials, including people, would have been seen for what it was:

A mortal threat to the organic nations of the world.

Disraeli became prime minister in 1868, and he expanded the empire, made Queen Victoria the Empress of India, and invaded Afghanistan.

From the epilogue of Disraeli by Robert Blake:

Disraeli added certain features peculiarly his own to the pattern with which he was to stamp the Conservative party, and these enhanced the contrast with Gladstonian liberalism: belief in empire; adoption of a tough, ‘no nonsense’, foreign policy; assertion of Britain’s or, as he would have said, England’s, greatness in the world. Disraeli was unsympathetic to all forms of nationalism except English nationalism - this was quite compatible with being most unEnglish himself - and he saw no reason, whether in Ireland or the Balkans or elsewhere, to allow what he considered English interests to be overridden by the supposedly higher moral law that encourages the emancipation of nations ‘rightly struggling to be free’.

Posted by Morgan on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:39 | #

Disraeli’s policies were explicitly based on not giving a damn about the nations of the world while claiming to promote English interests. So I suppose he wasn’t completely dishonest about being “a mortal threat to the organic nations of the world.”

Posted by Morgan on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:52 | #

Maybe Graham Lister is just trying to justify his taste for international travel. Perhaps he has similar tastes to the former culture minister of France: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/6270217/Frederic-Mitterrand-admitted-to-paying-for-sex-with-young-boys-in-Thailand.html

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:10 | #

Curse Cromwell

Posted by Wandrin on Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:52 | #

Interesting stuff.

Posted by boots on Fri, 21 Dec 2012 01:44 | #

What about the carbohydrate theory of obesity? That seems popular these days. Or does this bacteria make you eat more carbs or something?