Saturday, December 08, 2012

Metallica cashes in, soccer dodges a bullet and elephant poop coffee


- Smoking is already revolting, but another reason to hate that filthy habit is always welcome. Bearing this in mind, enjoy the fact that, according to a study conducted by researchers at the Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies at Brown University, smoking may worsen a hangover after drinking heavily. Even though they don’t know exactly why, Dr. Damaris Rohsenow and his colleagues believe that based on the smoking and drinking habits of 113 college students, smoking after going on a hellacious bender may make the resulting hangover that much worse. Researchers asked the students to keep a diary for eight weeks, recording their drinking and smoking habits and any hangover symptoms. Those who downed an impressive six beers and hour and smoked suffered a worse hangover.At the same number of drinks, people who smoke more that day are more likely to have a hangover and have more intense hangovers,” Rohsenow said. "And smoking itself was linked to an increased risk of hangover compared with not smoking at all. That raises the likelihood that there is some direct effect of tobacco smoking on hangovers.” The study centered on students from a Midwestern university who reported the number of drinks consumed, number of cigarettes smoked and their hangover symptoms, including whether they felt more tired than usual, had a headache, felt nauseated and had difficulty concentrating on things. Based on the reported amount of alcohol consumed, the researchers then estimated blood alcohol concentration (BAC) and used that figure to control for differences between sexes as it took into account weight and the period over which the student drank alcohol. When the numbers were crunched, it became clear that smoking more heavily the day before increased the presence and severity of hangover the next day - but only after a heavy drinking episode. Extrapolating much from the study will be difficult because it did not prove causality, but smoking seems even more revolting than usual, always a positive………


- The U.S. Secret Service should be trustworthy in keeping track of top-secret information. It should be, but clearly it isn’t, not if sensitive data is being left on a subway train. While it may not have been an actual Secret Service agent, a contractor working for the U.S. Secret Service accidentally left a pouch containing two computer backup tapes on a train in Washington's Metrorail subway system. Über-sensitive Secret Service personnel and investigative information were on the tapes and if that information is accessed, it could be highly damaging, according to sources. This absent-minded contractor was transporting the pouch from Secret Service headquarters in Washington to a now-closed data facility in Maryland when he or she got off a Metro train and left it behind. When the contractor realized the mistake, the Secret Service and the Metro police were contacted, but an extensive search yielded no results. The good news is that this incident occurred nearly five years ago, in February 2008. If that information hasn’t been accessed and used by now, odds are it won't be. However, the incident is now the subject of an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General, according to congressional sources. Depending on the sensitivity of the information, it could pose a threat to the lives of Secret Service personnel and their families. However, the Secret Service says no lives were put at risk and no fraud was committed as a result of the loss. A better question is why the agency would place sensitive information on a removable set of tapes. "These back-up tapes were not marked or identified in any way and were protected by multiple layers of security," the agency said in an official statement. "They could not be accessed without the proper equipment, applications and encoding." Then again, encryption has evolved significantly since 2008, so maybe that’s no longer true……….


- Soccer has dodged a major scud. A catastrophe nearly struck the world’s game, but all is well now that FC Barcelona star Lionel Messi is A-OK. Messi suffered a bone bruise to his left knee as Barcelona was held to a 0-0 tie by Benfica in a Champions League match on Wednesday night thanks to a vicious strike to his knee by….wait for it….an opponent’s hand. Yes, the sort of contact that a player in another sport would shrug off and play through was enough to send Messi collapsing to the turf in agony after his left knee collided with the right hand of Benfica's Artur as he ran onto Gerard Pique's long pass and tried to round the goalkeeper in the 85th minute. Messi, largely considered the best soccer player in the world, managed to get a left-footed shot off from an awkward angle before remembering he is a soccer player and therefore required to go down like he’s been shot by a sniper any time someone passes within five feet of him. He fell to the field in pain, rolled onto his back and held the knee and was then loaded onto a cart. ''It's a bruise, which doctors have been having a look at,'' Barcelona coach Tito Vilanova said. ''We now have to wait for the results of tests, but the feeling is that it isn't more serious than a knock.'' Tests subsequently confirmed that Messi had a bone bruise on the outside of his left knee, but he was cleared to play Sunday so the bruise is obviously not as bad as he initially tried to show with his overwrought theatrics on the field. Had the injury actually been serious, it would have been a crushing end to a year in which the three-time FIFA Player of the Year has  84 goals for Barcelona and Argentina, one shy of Gerd Mueller's 40-year-old record for most goals in a calendar year for club and country. Take a deep breath, pass the Capri Sun pouches and take a nice, big bite out of that orange wedge, soccer fans, it’s going to be all right……….


- Rich people often pay absurd amounts of money to eat or drink disgusting things from obscure places simply because it sets them apart from everyone else, the wasting of hundreds of dollars on some meat from a rare animal or a wine from a far-flung corner of the globe. Whether it’s squid eggs or a rare kind of eel from the Amazon, rich folk place a high value on eating unusual foods that will give them something to brag about. This one may be the most absurd yet because it is a product derived from the butts of elephants – really. A herd of 20 elephants living in the lush hills of northern Thailand are crapping out materials to brew some of the world's most expensive coffee. The resulting beverage is being billed as earthy in flavor and smooth on the palate, although brewing with beans eaten by Thai elephants and plucked a day later from their dung is inherently disgusting. According to entrepreneur Blane Dinkin, a reaction inside the elephant’s stomach creates the coffee’s unique taste. "When an elephant eats coffee, its stomach acid breaks down the protein found in coffee, which is a key factor in bitterness," Dinkin said. "You end up with a cup that's very smooth without the bitterness of regular coffee." Based on that alleged lack of bitterness, Dinkin sells his overpriced cup of joe for nearly $500 a pound. The good news is that it is presently very difficult for a person to throw away $500 for one pound of coffee because Black Ivory Coffee, which launched last month, is only available at a few luxury hotels in remote corners of the world — first in northern Thailand, then the Maldives and now Abu Dhabi — with the price tag of about $50 a serving. The beans are, um, processed at a site in the Golden Triangle region that has typically been known more for cranking out drugs than for crafting coffee. Why is the blend so pricey? For starters, Dinkin spent $300,000 developing the coffee. He worked with a Canadian-based veterinarian that ran blood tests on zoo elephants showing they don't absorb any caffeine from eating raw coffee cherries to make sure the process was safe. Additionally, it takes 72 pounds of raw coffee cherries to produce 2 pounds of Black Ivory coffee. Despite its steep price (or perhaps because of it), Black Ivory's maiden batch of 150 pounds has already sold out………


- Metallica, the band that famously went in front of Congress and led the crusade against (supposedly) illegal music downloading services like Napster, has at long last reached a détente with its nemesis of more than a decade. For 12 long years, the metal legends have feuded with Napster co-founder Sean Parker even though his now-former company long ago shifted from a medium for thrifty music fans to download free copies of their favorite songs into a pay-to-use service that has become an afterthought in the world of iTunes. The battle officially came to an end with Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich appearing on stage with Parker to announce that the band’s entire back catalog will be made available to music streaming service Spotify, in which Parker is an investor. The two frenemies took the stage to discuss their bitter legal battle that took place in 2000 while also turning the event into a press conference to announce new Spotify features. According to the company, it now has more than 5 million paid subscribers worldwide. Baed in the United Kingdom, Spotify claims it has paid out over $500 million to record labels since the service launched and has accrued a total of 20 million users overall, 15 million of whom use the free, ad-heavy version of its product. Along with adding Metallica to the fold, Spotify has also added the ability to "follow" influential artists and their tastes, including pop hack Justin Bieber, Beatles legend Paul McCartney and even President Barack Obama. Spotify chief executive Daniel Ek showed off the new features, which are designed to connect users with new music they are predicted to like based on their existing favorites. Still, the oddest sight of the day had to be a member of the same band that sued Napster in 2000 on copyright infringement claims shaking hands with its founder, accepting a massive payday and proving that all it ever cared about was money. "Back in 1999 we were depicted as these greedy pirates that basically were just trying to create a free-for-all and enable the stealing of music," Parker said. "We just wanted to make music more free as in freedom, not free as in theft.” "When you live in a bubble the main thing you want is complete control over what you do," Ulrich said of his band’s part in the feud. “That was taken away. The control option had been taken away from us - and then it turned into a street fight. Let's meet them in the back alley." Meet in that alley, hand over a briefcase full of cash and clearly, it’s all good……….

No comments: