Pet Peeves

PP: political attack ads. I'm going to vote based on what the candidates stand for, not the notion that one guy is slightly less noxious than the others.
 
People taking so long at the security checkpoint and complaining.... HELLO IT IS PART OF LIFE THAT IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE SO GET OVER IT!
 
PP: having the guy you trained for your old job tweak and improve the job in ways you wouldn't have thought of in a million years.
 
passive aggressive co workers that go behind your back to tell everyone you analysed things wrong, and do it just loud enough to make sure you hear
 
PP: Authority and bureaucracy and getting stuck sitting by grandma at the wedding of a cousin lots younger than you.

"If you had longer hair and spoke softer, you'd be married by now."
 
PP: When "officials" on the so-called "radio" talk about radiation exposure in Japan. I understand that the levels people are being exposed to are small overall, however I don't think it is proper to state that there is no danger whatsoever. It smacks of the problem of classical toxicology in that the only dosage they are concerned about it is one that shows clinical symptoms. In other words, radiation sickness. What I would like to see are longitudinal studies showing that receiving a small "extra" dose of radiation does not manifest as sub-clinical symptoms (no obvious outward signs). I don't know that such studies exist for ethical reasons, and if they do then they would probably be studies commissioned after nuclear disasters such as this one. I'm not trying to be all OMG radiation death! I just wish the precautionary principle was something these people knew or cared about when they talk to the public. Am I being crazy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top