You have a serious problem with anything other than boolean logic, huh? Good luck with that.

It could have just as easily been malware. Careful review of outside contributions is a good idea.

You know what is one of the traits I like least in a person? When they assume that it's everyone else who is ignorant, rather than check their facts.

Yes, one meaning of converse - apparently the only one you know - is to take part in a conversation. However, there is another meaning which has a similar meaning to inverse and obverse.

So basically, your post is laden with iron. Very irony in fact. Such disdain. Wow.

It's not ignorant to think that food plays a role in bowel problems. There are many recognised conditions that are aggravated by certain foods.. so to think that simply taking a pill, but continuing to eat any old shit is a good way to treat it.. that's pretty a pretty ignorant way of looking at it.

Going on a low carbohydrate diet a few years ago (to lose weight) cleared up several other problems that I wouldn't have even related to diet at the time (such as my nose almost always being irritated and blocked).

I don't need to lose any weight right now, but after reading this thread, I'm thinking I'll go back to no carb again for a while and see how it affects me.

Irritation causes inflammation. It might appear to be a disease if you can't figure out what is causing the irritation.

Sure, that's what science "knows" about it so far, but the idea that gut bacteria are a deciding factor also fits perfectly along with your "genetic or environmental" concept. If all you have is a hammer (genetics, environmental observation) then everything looks like a nail. Maybe there's more to it than bacteria, but the chemicals that we put into our body very obviously can affect behaviour and mental state.

Yep, but the one that helps disrupted the already established bacteria, probably by reducing their supply chain. The fact that this chemical was elevated 48 time above normal levels in the autistic mice suggests that it's produced by the "bad" bacteria somehow.

Probably quite a lot through the course of the day, though I suppose a lot of them might die in that environment. I guess I should have said "gut", then. When I say "stomach" I'm often referring to the whole intestinal area, the same as someone might say "lie on your stomach", when in fact they mean your belly..

Is it not the case that the metabolite is necessary for the problem bacteria to replicate - but that the healthy mice don't have these bacteria in the first place, so introducing it won't have the same effect?

Did you consider that it might not be passed on through DNA at all, and completely is a result of the environment, including the bacteria that your mum's side of the family have in their body? Or perhaps your DNA makes you more susceptible to these bacteria. I've been trying to figure out how exactly food affects my mood and behaviour for a while now..

The thing is that if it's gut microbes, then good food will cause problems too. It will depend exactly what the bacteria's preferred food source is though. And toxins from bacteria in your stomach can absolutely affect your mood and ability to function.

Good point :p I was just thinking of my friends who are always concerned about a few pennies difference on groceries, but I guess they can't afford a new car in the first place. And electric cars aren't going to be great in the used market until battery tech/cost improves.

I am not saying that something like the Manhattan Project was wrong. I am merely saying that the deep ethical consideration suggested by the author isn't really warranted for mere "technology of violence", that its more appropriate for the WMD end of the spectrum. My understanding is that many of the scientists and engineers who knew the project's actual goal did consider what they were doing before taking the project to completion and I think that was a good thing. I've heard that some of the scientists working on Germany's bomb made some key errors that may not have been accidental. Maybe that's urban myth but If so they may have thought about what they were doing and made a good decision as well.

You are mistaken. The law restricts both fields.

"Drugmaker Fresenius Kabi said shipments of the anesthetic propofol were halted to a Louisiana distributor for 4 1/2 months through mid-March because the company feared the European Union would ban export of the drug altogether if it was used in executions ... The death penalty is banned in the European Union, and the 27-country bloc, of which Germany is a part, bans the export of drugs for use in executions."
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/11/20911326-german-drug-firm-halts-us-anesthetic-exports-after-finding-it-was-sent-for-executions

To avoid redundancy see http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4522905&cid=45610821