The question is what is a good type of food that would entice someone to steal that I can successfully mix ipecac in? I'm thinking something along the line of desserts. Perhaps brownies or a cheesecake.
That would be funny, but also potentially dangerous. You should buy biohazard bags to start bringing your lunch in. Maybe whoever is stealing food will think twice before eating it then!
That would be funny, but also potentially dangerous. You should buy biohazard bags to start bringing your lunch in. Maybe whoever is stealing food will think twice before eating it then!
Hmm, you're right. I can see the "victim" suing for medical complications. Ro, do you think you could convince your manager or whoever to let you keep a mini fridge under your desk? Another solution, like the biohazard thing, is to put prescription labels on stuff to make it look like its got drugs in it or something, like you are eating special food due to a medical condition.
Well I can always put all my food in a bag and tie it up. That normally deters people from making all the effort of untying a plastic bag and making a lot of noise to even look at the food inside.
I work in closed room with one other coworker so I could get a mini fridge, but I'd rather not spend money on it.
My best bet would be to just bring my food in every day and leave it at that.
EDIT: Or you take the mature route and talk to your supervisor about it. They should do a non-specific "hey don't take food that's not yours" address and sort of shame everyone at the same time.
My supervisor can't do anything and doesn't really care. Our floor is currently having issues with the Janitorial staff. We've had several missing items reported over the last few months.
For some odd reason I am recalling news reports of people being liable for the ills suffered by the people who stole the food. This seems the safest way to flag the offender and not get yourself in legal trouble. Blue hands are hard to explain away.
In Elizabethan England, the rectum was known as the "fundament," and a rectal prolapse was called a "fallen fundament." The treatment was to tie it back up with string and apply some bullshit ointment daily.
That is so wrong, but can't stop laughing. That's just as bad as when people would treat gonorrhea by "clapping" the penis to force the infection out, hence the nickname "The Clap".
I like how the causes of it can be associated with: advanced age, long term constipation, long term straining during defecation, receiving anal sex, long term diarrhea, high gastrointestinal helminth loads, pregnancy and stresses of childbirth, previous surgery, cystic fibrosis, COPD, and sphincter paralysis.
Jeez, I wish I'd been here for the religion argument.
I really don't understand why some atheists get so upset with believers. I really, really don't care what others believe as long as they don't try to force me to have the same belief. When atheists get all bent out of shape, they are usually pretty indistinguishable from the religious types they rail against. What's the problem? They don't think the same as you? Isn't that sort of intolerance the thing that alienates a lot of atheists from religion in the first place?
I agree with Pete and Lou. This argument goes nowhere and is really just mental masturbation. Time could be better spent doing something more productive than railing against a scientist who can be a scientist and a religious type at the same time.
Also, big loss of respect for the "no true Scotsman" argument.
I have a friend who lives in Norman, OK. It is currently surrounded by tornadoes and is in the middle of a tornadic supercell. I cannot stop watching the goddamn weather news.
Also, big loss of respect for the "no true Scotsman" argument.
Which one? It's not a "no-true" Scotsman" if you use the Scotsman's own rules.
Scotsman (with black hair): "To be a Scotsman, one must have red hair." Naysayer: "You do not have red hair, and therefore are not a Scotsman by your own definition."
The majority of people who call themselves "Catholics" in the US aren't likely so by the church's definitions. Many people who call themselves "Christians" proceed to make up personal definitions of the word, as they do not satisfy most of the dictionary definitions.
I really don't understand why some atheists get so upset with believers. I really, really don't care what others believe as long as they don't try to force me to have the same belief.
Believing stupid things often makes people do stupid things, and I don't want people to do stupid things that make their own lives, or those of other people, worse. In particular,
Apparently when a medical professional says "You may feel some moderate cramping," they actually mean "I'ma make you hurt so bad that you yelp like a wounded puppy."
It's worse than that. Voting, whatever. Democracy is broken and our representatives do what they want anyway.
No, the problem is that, being a social animal, humans pay more attention to people in their community than they do to people outside of it. So, those people with crazy-assed beliefs have way more influence on the people around them than non-crazy people do.
My problem is that crazy promulgates way better than does sanity.
Apparently when a medical professional says "You may feel some moderate cramping," they actually mean "I'ma make you hurt so bad that you yelp like a wounded puppy."
Yes. Generally, they mean "the full extent of this word." "Severe" cramping means objectively severe. Enough to make anyone say, "Yup, that was severe."
Apparently when a medical professional says "You may feel some moderate cramping," they actually mean "I'ma make you hurt so bad that you yelp like a wounded puppy."
Yes. Generally, they mean "the full extent of this word." "Severe" cramping means objectively severe. Enough to make anyone say, "Yup, that was severe."
She actually apologized to me because she forgot to tell me that it would hurt much more because I haven't had children.
Went to analyze some new sonar data we recorded yesterday only to realize that our SDK provided by the manufacturer is out of date and throws errors upon loading the files. The only solution is to wait for support to e-mail me with a link to an updated version.
Comments
I work in closed room with one other coworker so I could get a mini fridge, but I'd rather not spend money on it.
My best bet would be to just bring my food in every day and leave it at that.
EDIT: Or you take the mature route and talk to your supervisor about it. They should do a non-specific "hey don't take food that's not yours" address and sort of shame everyone at the same time.
Or indelible ink on the bag.
We pretty much have to lock up everything now.
Today we looked up rectal prolapse.
I need to find a happy place.
You've been warned.
In Elizabethan England, the rectum was known as the "fundament," and a rectal prolapse was called a "fallen fundament." The treatment was to tie it back up with string and apply some bullshit ointment daily.
I like how the causes of it can be associated with: advanced age, long term constipation, long term straining during defecation, receiving anal sex, long term diarrhea, high gastrointestinal helminth loads, pregnancy and stresses of childbirth, previous surgery, cystic fibrosis, COPD, and sphincter paralysis.
One more reason why I fear having babies now.
I really don't understand why some atheists get so upset with believers. I really, really don't care what others believe as long as they don't try to force me to have the same belief. When atheists get all bent out of shape, they are usually pretty indistinguishable from the religious types they rail against. What's the problem? They don't think the same as you? Isn't that sort of intolerance the thing that alienates a lot of atheists from religion in the first place?
I agree with Pete and Lou. This argument goes nowhere and is really just mental masturbation. Time could be better spent doing something more productive than railing against a scientist who can be a scientist and a religious type at the same time.
Also, big loss of respect for the "no true Scotsman" argument.
Scotsman (with black hair): "To be a Scotsman, one must have red hair."
Naysayer: "You do not have red hair, and therefore are not a Scotsman by your own definition."
The majority of people who call themselves "Catholics" in the US aren't likely so by the church's definitions. Many people who call themselves "Christians" proceed to make up personal definitions of the word, as they do not satisfy most of the dictionary definitions. They vote.
No, the problem is that, being a social animal, humans pay more attention to people in their community than they do to people outside of it. So, those people with crazy-assed beliefs have way more influence on the people around them than non-crazy people do.
My problem is that crazy promulgates way better than does sanity.