Armed to the teeth

It sometimes amazes me how often scientists come up with reports that 'prove' what I already knew.

The case in point today is a piece of news I found on newscientist.com, which states that a study by a scientific team of the University of Pennsylvania have discovered that you are far likelier to get shot and killed if you are carrying a firearm yourself.

Of course, it's called news, but it isn't, really. That is, the only newsworthy bit of it is that scientists have actually spent valuable time and resources studying it, since it seems to me this conclusion is entirely logical. Why do I think so?

If you are carrying a gun, there are several options:
1) You are in a profession in which gun-toting is allowed or obligatory (i.e. the police, military, secret service, etc.), which severely increases your chances of being shot and killed.
or
2) You are a regular inhabitant of the world of crime, which severely increases your chances of being shot and killed
or
3) You are in a country at war, which severely increases your chances of being shot and killed
or
4) You are in a country in which it is legal and desirable or fashionable to carry a gun (for instance, the USA), which means that many more people besides yourself will be carrying a gun as well. And since there are always people who cannot contain themselves and will use every weapon available if they feel threatened/angry/outraged/frustrated/fearful, this severely increases your chances of being shot and killed.

Did they really need scientific study to prove all that?

But here's the thing: according to the news item it would be 'impractical – not to say unethical – to randomly assign volunteers to carry a gun or not and see what happens.'

Hmmm...impractical or not, in order to make this study sound (not to say slightly less ridiculous), it's imperative that such on-hands trials should take place. It was difficult, but I think I've found a group of people who might jump at the challenge, as this is a subject that's close to their hearts.

So does anyone have the phone number for Charlton Heston and the National Rifle Association?

Men Wanted... or Wanted Men?

According to the BBC, scientists at the University of Edingburgh are searching for men to participate in a trial for contraceptive injections. Basically, these men would be injected with some sort of drug, and then they will be monitored to see what happens. Apparently, this particular cocktail is better at preventing pregnancy than condoms...

Imagine it: you're a single female, out on the town in Edinburgh when you happen to come across a man with whom you hit it off nicely. You have a drink, good conversation and before you know it, one thing leads to another: you end up in his bed.

Of course, you make sure the sex is safe and ask for a protection. 'Oh,' he says, 'that's not necessary, I'm protected! I'm in the contraceptive trials, so we don't need a condom!'

Nine months later, you're giving birth to your first child and your face is plastered all over he papers. The headlines: 'Male contraceptive injection trials fail - scientists state they "need to go back to the drawing board"'.

And that's all before you find out you've contracted Chlamydia.