- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, TXT, Maximum:11000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3797 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts][ Reply ]
24 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 427901
Has anyone ever attempted to make a foodstuff that is 100% useful to your body where none of it will be shat out the other end?
|>>|| No. 427954
It was how they got their buzz.
This assumes that faecal particles aren't blasted out when you fart which, as my underwear will reveal, is often not the case. I'm also pretty sure that at least some of the air you breathe ends up in your gut otherwise aerophagia wouldn't be an issue.
Assuming this is all true though we could still spray Britain's enemies with liquid shit.
I'm pretty sure sulphur is also present in eggy farts
|>>|| No. 427970
>Because your body practically runs on glucose, it is the body's fuel to sustain large parts of its metabolism.
>I think fat is also absorbed almost 100 percent, because it, too, used to be a rare energy source.
Your body can run on glucose or fat just as happily.
If you have access to glucose or fructose, your body will use that almost exclusively. Any fructose you eat is metabolised directly to fat. And excess glucose is metabolised into fat if signalled by insulin.
If you deplete your blood sugar and stores of glycogen, you start metabolising fat. After an initial period of your body ramping up the process, you can survive quite happily with no glucose in your diet at all.
The reason why most humans are able and willing to gorge on doughnuts and sweets until they're nearly sick, is because that might have once saved your life. Cavepersons stumbling across a bush full of berries or the like, would have ate as much as they could all in one go, the huge hit of glucose and fructose is nearly all stored as fat, and that fat could keep you alive for a week with no food if you needed it.
And that's the crux of the modern obesity pandemic. Sugar is perfectly fine for you, except when you have that doughnut Every-Single-Day.
>Think I read that a recent study showed a deficiency in a particular gut bacteria was a cause of autism, of all things.
>Possibly propagated by the same people who think vaccinations give you autism.
The difference between this and the anti-vax shite is that the link between autism (and many other mental disorders) and gut health has been verified by good quality research and likely chains of cause and effect are identified.
The idea of "the neurons in your gut", isn't the full picture and can be a bit misleading. However many of the associations between the gut and the brain are due to specific chemicals produced by gut bacteria which can pass into your body and affect your nervous system (the autism link is thought to be due to a chemical produced by c. difficile bacteria. Others associations may be linked to the immune system (depression has been shown to be a direct side-effect of the inflammatory immune response in some circumstances.) Some associations may simply be down to general health (as gut bacteria effect how readily your body will absorb certain vitamins and minerals.)
|>>|| No. 427974
>many of the associations between the gut and the brain are due to specific chemicals produced by gut bacteria which can pass into your body and affect your nervous system
Could these be harvested as some form of weapon?
|>>|| No. 427978
Speaking of probiotics, pseudoscientific claims for their efficacy are banned in the European Union. Next time you see an ad or read the packaging for a probiotic yoghurt look carefully and you'll notice that they only state that they contain bacteria cultures, and not that the bacteria cultures actually, y'know, do anything.
The latest Yakult campaign is really cheeky. "A little bottle of science", without mentioning what science really says about their product.
|>>|| No. 427979
So it's shoving a healthy person's poo up my bum or nothing?
I don't like science sometimes.
|>>|| No. 427981
Just eat an entirely fruit diet. It's not zero-waste, maximum efficiancy, but the kind of toilet time you'll be having will be entirely divorced from anything you've known before.
|>>|| No. 427988
The problem with these is:
A) Most people probably don't need any more lactobacillus in their guts.
B) Your stomach acid will kill everything in them pretty much instantly.
You probably get more benefit from sticking a yakult up your arse than from drinking it.
|>>|| No. 427989
When they do fecal transplants (yes lads that's what it's called) as an actual medical procedure, they essentially make it into a milkshake you hold your nose and chug. How come your stomach acid doesn't render that pointless? There's plenty of stuff stomach acid doesn't kill outright, that's how you get food poisoning. I'm guessing whatever is actually in Yakult is just pointless random flora to begin with though.
Regardless, I would like to know if anyone has done the necessary research into putting Yakult up their arse.
|>>|| No. 427990
>I would like to know if anyone has done the necessary research into putting Yakult up their arse
We should put a thesis to Ben Goldacre. I'm sure he'd find Yakult up the arse more palatable than weapons-grade autism.
|>>|| No. 427992
>I'm sure he'd find Yakult up the arse more palatable than weapons-grade autism.
I don't know how or why this distinction was made.
|>>|| No. 427995
The two questions thrown up by this thread are:-
• Are you better off pouring Yakult down your pie hole or your poo hole?
• If a pregnant woman was exposed to enough farts from autistic people would it increase the likelihood of her child being born autistic? If so, can we manufacture chemical weapons to spread autism?
|>>|| No. 428003
>The answer to the first two questions is no
Can you please explain why? If you pour vodka up your arse it's more potent than drinking it so I don't see why that doesn't apply to Yakult.
|>>|| No. 428004
You're not significantly better off pouring vodka or yakult into any part of you really.
|>>|| No. 428006
>If so, can we manufacture chemical weapons to spread autism?
There has been research into producing a gay bomb to be used on enemy soldiers, so why not develop an autism bomb as well.
>The "gay bomb" and "halitosis bomb" are formal names for two non-lethal psychochemical weapons that a United States Air Force research laboratory speculated about producing. The theories involve discharging female sex pheromones over enemy forces in order to make them sexually attracted to each other.
Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase Make Love Not War.
|>>|| No. 428008
I don't think just dousing someone's bunkmate in hormones would be enough to start a platoon wide M2M arsepissing extravaganza. He's still going to look, smell and sound like something dredged out of a swamp.
|>>|| No. 428011
I dunno, lad. Sometimes when I've majorly got the horn I'd be prepared to do all sorts of depraved deeds that would utterly horrify me once the post-ejaculation clarity arrives. If someone invented some form of severe stonk on spray who knows what sordid scenarios I could find myself in.
|>>|| No. 428012
Careful, now. We've got horses and dogs, and they get completely obsessed when they smell receptive lady-horse or dog. They'd be absolutely no fucking use in a war. Are you so sure we're not susceptible? I know it's not so obvious, but how much of it is less drive, and how much is politeness? As a hetero, it's obviously going to take a fair amount of convincing to jump on a hairy arse, but if half your squaddies really, really want a wank, I can see that being unhelpful.
Officers can just sort it out over a biscuit, as usual.
|>>|| No. 428014
I think as a soldier in combat, your sex drive is not your main concern, it's going to be dodging bulets and mortar shells, and drones. Not really the kind of environment that's going to make you want to jump anything that moves.
But if you're locked up in a prison with little to do all day, that's a different matter. "Prison gay" is really a thing, where men have sex with other men simply because of the fact that that is going to be the only human intimacy with another person that they will have for the next five or ten years.
Between having a cell mate wank you off or not having anybody at all give you a hand job for the next decade, which are you going to choose?
|>>|| No. 428015
>I think as a soldier in combat, your sex drive is not your main concern, it's going to be dodging bulets and mortar shells, and drones. Not really the kind of environment that's going to make you want to jump anything that moves.
Isn't there a lot of rape in war zones?
|>>|| No. 428016
As far as I know that's never done.
The usually do it via colonoscopy, and rarely with a feeding tube through your nose directly to your stomach.
|>>|| No. 428017
There is, but I think that's usually more about humiliating the enemy. Also, I am sure it doesn't happen right while there's bombs and bullets flying all around you.
|>>|| No. 428022
What if the pheromones were so strong that they elicited the sensation that your side has already won, prompting them to aggressively bum one another? I bet they'd be so ashamed afterwards that many would kill themselves. Now that's a weapon.
|>>|| No. 428041
>>428028 In all this rain, what with constantly going in & out, I've been seriously considering a cloak or poncho or something. I'm sure I spend more than 10 minutes a day wrestling my arms in & out of coats.
Problem is, it's a fucking cloak. Surely there's some alternative. At the moment, I'm tending to just wear a big hat, but that's not ideal either.
|>>|| No. 430396
US doctors are hoping to start offering women vaginal fluid transplants and have set up a programme to screen potential donors.
They believe some women could benefit from a dose of healthy vaginal microbes to protect against an infection called bacterial vaginosis (BV). The Johns Hopkins University team say they were inspired by the success of faecal or poo transplants.
It won't be long now.
|>>|| No. 430422
The guy who invented Soylent almost killed himself by destroying his gut flora and then only drinking Soylent, based on OPs theory.
Genuinely worries me how someone who invented a nutritional supplement could be so fucking thick.
|>>|| No. 430472
I'm not a doctor, a biologist or even a self-accredited "nutrition expert", but could it have been folly for the OP to assume that shitting is not "useful"?
This was probably already brought up months ago, but whatever, I didn't force you to read my post.
|>>|| No. 430474
It appears that the most useful thing is the microbes in your gut, which is why transplanting faecal matter from healthy people to unhealthy people to make them better is becoming a thing. This begs the question whether you could transplant faecal matter from an unhealthy person to a healthy person to make them ill and if this could be weaponised.
|>>|| No. 430479
All you really have to do to make someone unwell is shit on their food. Healthy or not.
|>>|| No. 430480
Why are you so obsessed with this? It's like the super dinosaur from Jurassic World 2, just a less efficient way of killing someone than shooting them. You're trying to reinvent the wheel.
|>>|| No. 430481
Think about it, lad. If you shoot someone then people will know about it. If you create biological weapons from the guts of people with autism and release them undetected in say, Finland, then you could turn it into a country of barely communicative stunted spergs without anyone being any the wiser.
|>>|| No. 430482
And what are you going to do with it after, turn it into a zombie apocalypse theme park?
|>>|| No. 430483
>people with autism and release them undetected in say, Finland
I was going to post a picture of Pertti Pasanen, but I fear the mods' wrath.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ Last 50 posts ]