Archive | people RSS feed for this section

Do Not Give This To Your Children (Give This To Your Children)

14 Mar

March 14, 2017

Watching TV is like watching all the worst in life. No, I haven’t been watching American Chopper reruns, I’m talking about commercials. In particular, I’m talking about commercials for medicine. They are so full of disclaimers and legal jargon that I’m not sure if I should ask my doctor or lawyer if I should take something. But if I’m diagnosing myself based on symptoms recited by a talking pink pill, I may have other problems besides an upset stomach. 

I was watching TV when an ad for Linzess came on. As far as made up medicine names go, Linzess is better than Prevnar 13, which they claim is a pneumonia medication but I think is really a planet where Captain Kirk fought the Klingons. 

Linzess is medicine for constipation and belly pain. Yes, it is for “belly” pain and not “stomach” pain. Hey, why use a medical term in a medicine commercial? Check it out here, from the official Linzess website, complete with a cute girl with a backed up dumper:

As I was listening to the commercial I heard a couple of caveats, which I highlighted above.

  • Do not give LINZESS to children who are less than 6 years of age. It may harm them.
  • You should not give LINZESS to children 6 years to less than 18 years of age. It may harm them.

What’s the difference?
Under no circumstances should you give this to kids under 6. Nope, not at all. Don’t do it.
You shouldn’t give it to kids between 6 and 18, but maybe, if you want to, nudge nudge wink wink. We won’t tell.

Why not just say “Do not give Linzess to children who are under eighteen”? Is it OK to take a chance with a 14 year old? It does sort of hint that you can give it to an older kid. After all, you should not buy off-brand frozen fish from the dollar store but people do it all the time. So why not take a shot with your kid’s health?

What is the difference between “do not give” and “you should not give”? 
The question is Imponderable.

This has been Imponderable #134

 

.

Advertisements

But Is It Art? (No, It Isn’t Art)

25 Feb

February 25, 2017

This story comes from Midnight in the Desert, which is the site for the Art Bell Show. OH, sorry, which was the site for the Art Bell Show. Yep, Art unretired then retired yet again. But the site remains standing and the news remains odd. 

Once again, it is time for another installment of Mr. Blog’s ongoing battle with so-called “art.” Maybe we need another term, one keeping more in line with the political climate. Maybe we can call this “fake art.” Or how about “alt-art”? Read the article and we’ll decide.

man-in-rock-article

Abraham Poincheval is no stranger to daring performance art, but his latest project is probably the toughest one yet. The French artist will spend eight straight days sealed in a human shaped hole carved out inside a giant boulder. The purpose of this unusual performance – “to find out what the world is”.

On February 22, 2017, 45-year-old Poincheval was sealed in this carved out stone sarcophagus at Paris’s Palais de Tokyo gallery, where he will allegedly spend eight straight days, until March 1st. His temporary prison, a large boulder split in two with just enough room to fit the artist’s body in sitting position, and enough food and water to keep him in good physical condition over his eight days of isolation. His only connection to the outside world is a ventilation duct that keeps him from suffocating in the tight space.

“The purpose is to feel the aging stone inside the rock,” told media reporters. “There is my own breathing, and then the rock which lives, still humid because it was extracted not so long ago from the quarry. So there is that flow, that coming and going, between myself and the stone.”

Speaking for a moment as a scientist (yes, I have a degree in advanced scientifity from an online Turkish university) I must point out that rocks are not, technically, alive. But let’s take this loon’s statement seriously. If the rock was alive, then he must have killed it when he cut it in half and hollowed it out. Way to go, murderer.

The guy wants to “find out what the world is.” Is the inside of a rock the best place to do that? It may be the exact opposite of that. Caine from Kung Fu walked the Earth to find out about the world and who am I to argue with one of the most popular shows of the 1970’s? No one sat in a rock in any episode that I ever saw.

I was tempted to do some research to find out just who is paying for this nonsense, but quite honestly, I just don’t care that much. Frankly, I think this guy is trying to dodge either some creditors or an ex-wife. 

But back to the question at hand. The man will be living inside a rock for eight days. I’m sure people will go and look at the rock and flock there to see, well, absolutely nothing but hey, this somehow is called “performance” art. So is this art? Is this, by any stretch of the imagination, art? 

No.

I don’t think “fake art” or “alt-art” covers this. I prefer the good, old-fashioned “crap.”

See? Even these cartoon kids and their musical dog know.

See? Even these cartoon kids and their musical dog know.

%d bloggers like this: