- Email: [email protected]
The old days
To join the debate, visit newscientist.com/letters
That’s funny From Joop van Montfoort Tom Chatfield’s article on the linguistic revolution fuelled by digital technology (6 April, p 30) explores the possible origins of the expression LOL, which is usually interpreted as meaning laughing out loud. What about the possibility that it comes from the Dutch word lol, which translates as “fun”? Croyde, Devon, UK
On the run From Brian Horton Your review of Adrian Raine’s book The Anatomy of Violence claimed that potential criminals can be detected at a young age by their low heartbeat, combined with a fearless, risk-taking personality (13 April, p 46). This sounds like a description of people who excel in sport. However, rather than locking up all the top athletes, perhaps we
can make a special effort to support them during, and especially after, they end their sporting careers, in order to protect them from turning to a life of crime! West Launceston, Tasmania, Australia
Mass stupidity From Alyson Irvin Your editorial on new insights into stupidity (30 March, p 5)
contained a stupid statement: the suggestion that the invasion of Iraq shows that “clever people can do monumentally stupid things”. You cannot discern the relative stupidity of an action unless you identify the stakeholders and identify their stake. To the general population living in the nations supporting the invasion it was stupid, as they had to risk both their life and limb and their economic resources. But it was stupid on their part not because they believed the flawed “intelligence” that led to the invasion, or that their leaders were misinformed, but because they erroneously assumed that their leaders were working for the interest of the people rather than their own, personal, interests. Cosby, Tennessee, US
very likely take resources away from the poor in countries such as the US. Basel, Switzerland
Thatcher legacy From Michael Ennis I enjoyed your editorial on Margaret Thatcher’s unique position as a UK prime minister with a science degree and her
DALY thought From Tom Smith, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute It was good to see attention drawn to the need for more resources to reduce child mortality in lowincome countries (6 April, p 28), but creating a system for trade in disability adjusted life years (DALYs) would be a perverse way of going about this. If such utopian schemes are to be considered, why not just fund it via a globally enforced tax on the very rich? Trading in DALYs wouldn’t be at all like carbon-trading. That’s because the data are very poor, and models for the effects of interventions on DALYs are a lot more uncertain and debatable than, for example, the known effects of burning coal on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. A further problem with the proposed system is that not all ways of reducing mortality are funded via health budgets. Critically, a system providing incentives for reallocating health expenditure between countries that doesn’t address inequities that exist within countries would
effect on science in the country (13 April, p 3). I have just read that her admirers are looking for a central London building to turn into a memorial to the great lady. Seeing that the Royal Institution is still facing an uncertain future despite a recent £4.4 million cash gift, is there a case for their money being used to preserve and invigorate this historic home of British science? Or would politics prevent it from accepting funding from such a source? Stroud, Gloucestershire, UK
We’re not immune From Arthur Law, East Anglian Centre for Palaeopathology & Palaeoanthropology Thomas Wilkins wrote in to suggest that antibiotics becoming ineffective would not be an apocalyptic threat, since we have innate immune systems (13 April, p 29). Immunity didn’t help the one in five who died from tuberculosis between 1500 and 1860, nor was it that successful at
protecting roughly half the population of Europe from the Black Death, many of whom could have been saved by streptomycin. Great Ryburgh, Norfolk, UK
Self belief From David Hobday In his letter, Ed Subitzky wonders what is the difference between the self and the illusion of self (13 April, p 29). I can help. Take Alice and Bob. Alice knows enough to live a healthy, happy life, and expects to die and be reduced to ash. She has no beliefs. Bob, while having the same knowledge and expectations as Alice, does have beliefs. He believes that he has a spiritual copy of his brain’s contents – memory, character, skills and the like. He believes that only the spiritual copy is conscious and that this is his real “self”. Alice calls her body and brain “self”. She calls the spiritual copy of Bob’s brain his “illusion of self”. Bateau Bay, New South Wales, Australia
The old days From Ken Green I fear that you really must rid yourself of those rose-tinted spectacles. Economic austerity doesn’t exist except perhaps in exploited communities in poorer countries (13 April, p 6). The phenomena that you report are but reversions to a nonaffluent pre-war lifestyle. Tintagel, Cornwall, UK
Letters should be sent to: Letters to the Editor, New Scientist, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 1280 Email: [email protected] Include your full postal address and telephone number, and a reference (issue, page number, title) to articles. We reserve the right to edit letters. Reed Business Information reserves the right to use any submissions sent to the letters column of New Scientist magazine, in any other format.
27 April 2013 | NewScientist | 35
That’s funny From Joop van Montfoort Tom Chatfield’s article on the linguistic revolution fuelled by digital technology (6 April, p 30) explores the possible origins of the expression LOL, which is usually interpreted as meaning laughing out loud. What about the possibility that it comes from the Dutch word lol, which translates as “fun”? Croyde, Devon, UK
On the run From Brian Horton Your review of Adrian Raine’s book The Anatomy of Violence claimed that potential criminals can be detected at a young age by their low heartbeat, combined with a fearless, risk-taking personality (13 April, p 46). This sounds like a description of people who excel in sport. However, rather than locking up all the top athletes, perhaps we
can make a special effort to support them during, and especially after, they end their sporting careers, in order to protect them from turning to a life of crime! West Launceston, Tasmania, Australia
Mass stupidity From Alyson Irvin Your editorial on new insights into stupidity (30 March, p 5)
contained a stupid statement: the suggestion that the invasion of Iraq shows that “clever people can do monumentally stupid things”. You cannot discern the relative stupidity of an action unless you identify the stakeholders and identify their stake. To the general population living in the nations supporting the invasion it was stupid, as they had to risk both their life and limb and their economic resources. But it was stupid on their part not because they believed the flawed “intelligence” that led to the invasion, or that their leaders were misinformed, but because they erroneously assumed that their leaders were working for the interest of the people rather than their own, personal, interests. Cosby, Tennessee, US
very likely take resources away from the poor in countries such as the US. Basel, Switzerland
Thatcher legacy From Michael Ennis I enjoyed your editorial on Margaret Thatcher’s unique position as a UK prime minister with a science degree and her
DALY thought From Tom Smith, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute It was good to see attention drawn to the need for more resources to reduce child mortality in lowincome countries (6 April, p 28), but creating a system for trade in disability adjusted life years (DALYs) would be a perverse way of going about this. If such utopian schemes are to be considered, why not just fund it via a globally enforced tax on the very rich? Trading in DALYs wouldn’t be at all like carbon-trading. That’s because the data are very poor, and models for the effects of interventions on DALYs are a lot more uncertain and debatable than, for example, the known effects of burning coal on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. A further problem with the proposed system is that not all ways of reducing mortality are funded via health budgets. Critically, a system providing incentives for reallocating health expenditure between countries that doesn’t address inequities that exist within countries would
effect on science in the country (13 April, p 3). I have just read that her admirers are looking for a central London building to turn into a memorial to the great lady. Seeing that the Royal Institution is still facing an uncertain future despite a recent £4.4 million cash gift, is there a case for their money being used to preserve and invigorate this historic home of British science? Or would politics prevent it from accepting funding from such a source? Stroud, Gloucestershire, UK
We’re not immune From Arthur Law, East Anglian Centre for Palaeopathology & Palaeoanthropology Thomas Wilkins wrote in to suggest that antibiotics becoming ineffective would not be an apocalyptic threat, since we have innate immune systems (13 April, p 29). Immunity didn’t help the one in five who died from tuberculosis between 1500 and 1860, nor was it that successful at
protecting roughly half the population of Europe from the Black Death, many of whom could have been saved by streptomycin. Great Ryburgh, Norfolk, UK
Self belief From David Hobday In his letter, Ed Subitzky wonders what is the difference between the self and the illusion of self (13 April, p 29). I can help. Take Alice and Bob. Alice knows enough to live a healthy, happy life, and expects to die and be reduced to ash. She has no beliefs. Bob, while having the same knowledge and expectations as Alice, does have beliefs. He believes that he has a spiritual copy of his brain’s contents – memory, character, skills and the like. He believes that only the spiritual copy is conscious and that this is his real “self”. Alice calls her body and brain “self”. She calls the spiritual copy of Bob’s brain his “illusion of self”. Bateau Bay, New South Wales, Australia
The old days From Ken Green I fear that you really must rid yourself of those rose-tinted spectacles. Economic austerity doesn’t exist except perhaps in exploited communities in poorer countries (13 April, p 6). The phenomena that you report are but reversions to a nonaffluent pre-war lifestyle. Tintagel, Cornwall, UK
Letters should be sent to: Letters to the Editor, New Scientist, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 1280 Email: [email protected] Include your full postal address and telephone number, and a reference (issue, page number, title) to articles. We reserve the right to edit letters. Reed Business Information reserves the right to use any submissions sent to the letters column of New Scientist magazine, in any other format.
27 April 2013 | NewScientist | 35