Talk:1260: LD50 - Revision history

Brenda at 01:06, 7 December 2018

2018-12-07T01:06:34Z

Brenda at 01:05, 7 December 2018

2018-12-07T01:05:36Z

199.27.133.127 at 20:56, 3 August 2014

2014-08-03T20:56:31Z

173.245.55.67 at 14:06, 1 April 2014

2014-04-01T14:06:57Z

108.162.250.8: The image is missing?

2013-12-05T10:32:52Z

The image is missing?

99.126.226.212 at 05:25, 7 September 2013

2013-09-07T05:25:50Z

99.126.226.212 at 05:24, 7 September 2013

2013-09-07T05:24:59Z

98.237.178.64: formatting fix

2013-09-06T01:42:08Z

formatting fix

98.237.178.64: different (worse) explanation

2013-09-06T01:37:50Z

different (worse) explanation

Flekkie at 23:50, 5 September 2013

2013-09-05T23:50:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:06, 7 December 2018
Line 38:		Line 38:
	Why is the image missing?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.8\|108.162.250.8]] 10:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)		Why is the image missing?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.8\|108.162.250.8]] 10:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

−	The pockets in the scientists' coats are to low for them to reach with their short arms. Just sayin'. [[User:Brenda\|Brenda]] ([[User talk:Brenda\|talk]]) 01:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)	+	The pockets in the scientists' coats are too low for them to reach with their short arms. Just sayin'. [[User:Brenda\|Brenda]] ([[User talk:Brenda\|talk]]) 01:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:05, 7 December 2018
Line 37:		Line 37:

	Why is the image missing?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.8\|108.162.250.8]] 10:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)		Why is the image missing?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.8\|108.162.250.8]] 10:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	The pockets in the scientists' coats are to low for them to reach with their short arms. Just sayin'. [[User:Brenda\|Brenda]] ([[User talk:Brenda\|talk]]) 01:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:56, 3 August 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	There's one toxicology paper that's facing us instead of laying flat. Is it just me, or is there a funny "concerned" face on it? --[[User:Druid816\|Druid816]] ([[User talk:Druid816\|talk]]) 05:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)		There's one toxicology paper that's facing us instead of laying flat. Is it just me, or is there a funny "concerned" face on it? --[[User:Druid816\|Druid816]] ([[User talk:Druid816\|talk]]) 05:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
		+	:I think that's just pareidolia at work [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.127\|199.27.133.127]] 20:56, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

	Oh my, when I checked the comic this morning I didn't even see Cueball lying underneath the stack of toxicology papers... --[[User:Buggz\|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz\|talk]]) 06:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)		Oh my, when I checked the comic this morning I didn't even see Cueball lying underneath the stack of toxicology papers... --[[User:Buggz\|Buggz]] ([[User talk:Buggz\|talk]]) 06:17, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 Could it be that by "administered orally", Randall means "verbally" (i.e. read out loud)?  I think that could be quite a funny interpretation... :-) [[User:Gregatar|Gregatar]] ([[User talk:Gregatar|talk]]) 18:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 :Aurally? [[Special:Contributions/79.45.204.116|79.45.204.116]] 16:55, 5 September 2013 (UTC)APB
 I totally agree with this 'verbally' thing, I was thinking the same, that a too large set of data read out loud would be fatal after a few 100 pages :) Include in explanation?

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:32, 5 December 2013
Line 33:		Line 33:

	The explanation of subcutaneous injection mentions blood clots in vessels. Subcutaneous injection in used in the medical field to refer to injections under the skin, but not inside muscle (intramuscular) or inside the veins (intravenous). IV would clearly be more lethal at a lower dose than subcutaneous and I would imagine Randall's intent was to describe an IV injection. I would expect the cause of death from paper particles injected under the skin to be infection if a small to moderate amount of paper was used to hemorrhage due to mechanical tearing of the skin and underlying tissues in a high dose.[[Special:Contributions/99.126.226.212\|99.126.226.212]] 05:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)		The explanation of subcutaneous injection mentions blood clots in vessels. Subcutaneous injection in used in the medical field to refer to injections under the skin, but not inside muscle (intramuscular) or inside the veins (intravenous). IV would clearly be more lethal at a lower dose than subcutaneous and I would imagine Randall's intent was to describe an IV injection. I would expect the cause of death from paper particles injected under the skin to be infection if a small to moderate amount of paper was used to hemorrhage due to mechanical tearing of the skin and underlying tissues in a high dose.[[Special:Contributions/99.126.226.212\|99.126.226.212]] 05:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	Why is the image missing?--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.8\|108.162.250.8]] 10:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:25, 7 September 2013
Line 32:		Line 32:
	When I first read this, I thought it was referring to a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\| fork bomb], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC) edited [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)		When I first read this, I thought it was referring to a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\| fork bomb], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC) edited [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

−	The explanation of subcutaneous injection mentions blood clots in vessels. Subcutaneous injection in used in the medical field to refer to injections under the skin, but not inside muscle (intramuscular) or inside the veins (intravenous). IV would clearly be more lethal at a lower dose than subcutaneous and I would imagine Randall's intent was to describe an IV injection. I would expect the cause of death from paper particles injected under the skin to be infection if a small to moderate amount of paper was used to hemorrhage due to mechanical tearing of the skin and underlying tissues in a high dose.	+	The explanation of subcutaneous injection mentions blood clots in vessels. Subcutaneous injection in used in the medical field to refer to injections under the skin, but not inside muscle (intramuscular) or inside the veins (intravenous). IV would clearly be more lethal at a lower dose than subcutaneous and I would imagine Randall's intent was to describe an IV injection. I would expect the cause of death from paper particles injected under the skin to be infection if a small to moderate amount of paper was used to hemorrhage due to mechanical tearing of the skin and underlying tissues in a high dose.[[Special:Contributions/99.126.226.212\|99.126.226.212]] 05:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:24, 7 September 2013
Line 31:		Line 31:

	When I first read this, I thought it was referring to a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\| fork bomb], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC) edited [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)		When I first read this, I thought it was referring to a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\| fork bomb], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC) edited [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	The explanation of subcutaneous injection mentions blood clots in vessels. Subcutaneous injection in used in the medical field to refer to injections under the skin, but not inside muscle (intramuscular) or inside the veins (intravenous). IV would clearly be more lethal at a lower dose than subcutaneous and I would imagine Randall's intent was to describe an IV injection. I would expect the cause of death from paper particles injected under the skin to be infection if a small to moderate amount of paper was used to hemorrhage due to mechanical tearing of the skin and underlying tissues in a high dose.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 6 September 2013
Line 30:		Line 30:
	:I don't think it's wrong, Randall just didn't draw all the experiments (like in [http://xkcd.com/882/ Significant]), but just the last one. The humour is just to show how the experiment is performed, not how many people it kills. The LD50 term just adds fun by using toxicology jargon.--[[Special:Contributions/92.231.34.227\|92.231.34.227]] 14:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)		:I don't think it's wrong, Randall just didn't draw all the experiments (like in [http://xkcd.com/882/ Significant]), but just the last one. The humour is just to show how the experiment is performed, not how many people it kills. The LD50 term just adds fun by using toxicology jargon.--[[Special:Contributions/92.231.34.227\|92.231.34.227]] 14:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

−	When I first read this, I thought it was referring to [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\|fork ~~bombs]~~], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)	+	When I first read this, I thought it was referring to a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\| fork bomb], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC) edited [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:37, 6 September 2013
Line 29:		Line 29:

	:I don't think it's wrong, Randall just didn't draw all the experiments (like in [http://xkcd.com/882/ Significant]), but just the last one. The humour is just to show how the experiment is performed, not how many people it kills. The LD50 term just adds fun by using toxicology jargon.--[[Special:Contributions/92.231.34.227\|92.231.34.227]] 14:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)		:I don't think it's wrong, Randall just didn't draw all the experiments (like in [http://xkcd.com/882/ Significant]), but just the last one. The humour is just to show how the experiment is performed, not how many people it kills. The LD50 term just adds fun by using toxicology jargon.--[[Special:Contributions/92.231.34.227\|92.231.34.227]] 14:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	When I first read this, I thought it was referring to [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_bomb\|fork bombs]], saying that the data was toxic to the computer and that the data's mass is twice its own mass, i.e. its size doubles before you know it. The toxicology explanation does seem more convincing though. [[Special:Contributions/98.237.178.64\|98.237.178.64]] 01:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)