The Straight Dope 02/25/2005

[email protected] Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:28:53 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.culture.publications.straight-dope
Message-ID <LISTMANAGER-2907760-726401-2005.02.25-09.28.55--gcps-straightdope-list#[email protected]>
The Straight Dope -- By Cecil Adams
http://www.straightdope.com

You are subscribed as: [[email protected]]

To unsubscribe CLICK on the URL below this line:
mailto:[email protected]
If you can't "click" above, then send a blank email to:
[email protected]
____________________________________________
THE STRAIGHT DOPE 02/25/2005

Dear Cecil:

Ever since I was a kid the media have warned about not
looking directly at a solar eclipse. The principal at our
school would always keep us inside to avoid our burning out
our retinas sneaking a peek. Are we all being fooled by an
urban legend that keeps getting recirculated every time
there's an eclipse? I've never seen a rash of stories after
an eclipse about people being blinded or needing glasses
because they couldn't resist the temptation to gaze. --Shub
from Ottawa, Canada 

~~~~~~
Looking for the perfect gift for that wedding, birthday, or
bar mitzvah? Straight Dope books are the very thing! See
http://www.straightdope.com/store.html
~~~~~~

Cecil replies:

We'll get to this directly, but first an acknowledgment.
Several times in recent weeks I've thanked Bibliophage of
the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board for his aid in
preparing these columns, and now must do so yet again. As
one of the last generalists in an era of information
overload, often I'll find an interesting letter in the Big
Box o' Questions and think: Confound it, what did that
little man from the Mayo Clinic call eye damage due to
eclipse gazing? How gratifying to then find a note from
Bibliophage in the margin: Cece, it's solar retinopathy. 

Right. To which one can only add that while the danger of
looking at solar eclipses may be exaggerated, it's no urban
legend. 

For more, see:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/050225.html


STRAIGHT DOPE CLASSIC #1 - 04/12/1985

Dear Straight Dope:

For the last several years, I've been dipping my lungs into
a substance called nitrous oxide-- known to dentists as
laughing gas, and on the street as whippets. In its most
portable form, the gas is packed into handy single-serving
cartridges, which are then discharged into a balloon or
metal cannister, from which the gas is inhaled. What follows
is ninety seconds of euphoria. As a clean-cut all-American
boy, I know that anything this enjoyable must be harmful.
But how--and how much? A friend showed me an article which
listed four dangers: (1) damage to the brain from lack of
oxygen; (2) damage to the lips from "freezer burn," caused
by excessively cold equipment; (3) damage to the lungs from
inhaling too much too soon; and (4) damage to the head from
hitting it during a nirvanaesque blackout. The last three
are trivial and easily avoidable (you'll have to take my
word on this one, Cece), and the first seems
insignificant--you don't go that long without oxygen in this
experience. But my question remains. Two questions,
actually. (1) How does the stuff work? (2) What's it doing
that can't be undone? I don't use it that often, but I'd
like to know how soon I can expect to start drooling down
the front of my person. --J.B., Iowa City  

Cecil replies: 

Aren't we getting a little old for this, J.? At the rate
some people are going, we won't know whether to attribute
drooling to drugs or the onset of second childhood. You'll
be interested to know there's a book called Nitrous Oxide
(Edmond Eger, editor), which reveals the following facts:  
(1) Despite oodles of scientific experiments, they don't
exactly know how nitrous oxide works. "The best surmise," it
says here, "is that the gas acts indirectly, perhaps through
a pain-inhibiting system in the spinal cord that releases a
substance whose effect in turn inhibits a particular
neurotransmitter required for pain-signal passage." Check.  

For more, see: 
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_223b.html

STRAIGHT DOPE CLASSIC #2 - 08/23/1985

Dear Cecil: 

Help me before my love life becomes even more messed up.
When chocolate became a mini- craze not too long ago, I
heard several times that "chocolate contains some of the
same chemicals that the human brain produces when you're in
love." First of all, O all-knowing one, is this true? And if
so, what is the practical effect? Might shrewdly feeding it
to my date increase my chances? Please let me know quickly;
I've got a hot one lined up for Saturday night. --Tom R.,
Hollywood, California 

Dear Tom:  

So you figure this is the real story behind Hershey's kisses, huh?
It all started a number of years ago with a theory proposed by two
doctors at the New York State Psychiatric Institute, Donald F. 
Klein and Michael R. Liebowitz. They suggested that the brain
of a person in love or otherwise feeling groovy contains large
quantities of phenylethylamine, a chemical that supposedly
produces an amphetaminelike high. Chocolate, it turns out,
also contains a lot of phenylethylamine, so . . .

For more, see:
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_227.html

____________________________________________
Here's how you can get your OWN FREE Subscription:
Send a blank mailto:[email protected]
____________________________________________
Copyright 1995 - 2005 Chicago Reader, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
You may forward this document by email ONLY if you
include the entire document INCLUDING the information
at the bottom of this publication
____________________________________________
Visit our good friends at Joke A Day http://www.jokeaday.com
They're kind enough to mail THE STRAIGHT DOPE for us.
Join the World's Largest Daily Humor List and receive daily
laughs in your email by sending mailto:[email protected]