spaced

I tried the fruit of this plant a while ago whilst in Tasmania where it has become a weed. Tim Low's Wild Food Plants of Australia said it was edible, the weeds brochure I scammed from the local wildlife people claimed that it was poisonous. I sampled the fruit not knowing what to expect but within seconds became quite convinced that Tim Low had it all wrong! The bitter resinous taste I encountered was by no means encouraging of further mouthfuls but from what you've discovered It looks like I needed to let the fruit ripen on the vine a bit longer. Thanks for the tip Black

Something to be enjoyed in moderation. The smoking of foods adds carcinogens much like you'd find in tobacco smoke, and in cultures where these foods are eaten more often, there seems to be a higher incidence of stomach cancers.

What a great way to start off a scientific article. I think these helmets are a sensible precaution. We just don't know the full extent of what all this electromagnetic radiation might be doing to our minds and bodies. You've only got to look back to some of the old footage of people bathing in DDT vapour to realise that reassurances from the experts are no guarantee that these things are safe. If it were me I'd sooner mount a makeshift quagi antenna and satellite dish to my head because I'd want to know what THEY'RE up to.

It (Schinus terebinthifolius), looks like the same plant I've seen growing around East Perth, which I've heard can remove the paint from a car park underneath it should the berries fall onto the car.

Templetonia - templetine? The genus is named in honour of the Irish botanist John Templeton, but then we can only guess as to where the name "Templeton" comes from. . . .

Darrgh? I'm only allowed to talk like a pirate for one day of the year?

I'm totally up for it, but october 5th is a Wednesday. I checked out the concurrent thread at EBA and it looks like it is in fact the 15th you are referring to - which I can't make. Would it be too much hassle to delay the gathering till the following Sunday (23rd), or have another one ?

September 22nd is the "World car free day" and has been for some time, although it looks like this chain letter completely misses the point. It's not simply a matter of not buying petrol - you're not allowed to drive a car at all and have to use human powered alternatives. The idea isn't to drive down the price of petrol but to encourage alternatives to the automobile. For more information check out: http://www.worldcarfree.net/wcfd/ And also these awesome quotes! http://www.quotegarden.com/car-free-day.html

You might want to look into that one Creach. The legal system is really just a game of semantics (and perhaps thankfully in your case with the WA drug laws, a poorly written one at that). If you're carrying home a trailor load of variegated phalaris plants or a bag full of Psilocybe mushrooms you're still in possession of a substance containing a schedule 9 poison. The Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 might be better entitled "a copper's guide to nicking druggies." It is workable application of drug laws which are contained in the Poisons Act 1964. You will notice that in certain parts of the MODA it says to refer back to the Poisons Act where ever they can't be bothered writing out full definitions. Maybe whilst your court case is taking place a large group could hold a silent vigil outside, each person in possession of a phalaris plant and printed receipt from place of purchase.

If you were to have a look in your local large chain hardware store's garden section you'd probably find a plant containing one or more schedule 9 poisons. If you had one of these stashed away for when the magistrate hands out the sentence then you could show him or her your plant, the receipt and acompanying GCMS readouts and then say "so what's your point?" At its core, as it is written, WA anti-drug law doesn't make much effort to distinguish between spiritually inclined, toadstool picking iconoclasts and young home improvement types caught up in the latest mass planted variegated phalaris trends.

Thanks Nabraxax. I'll have to check them out. I found the book being offered at a few websites though and when I made further enquiries it turns out they didn't have one after all. Some good points Torsten. The usual convention when describing the dissociation of salts is to have a two way arrow in the equation: CaOxalate + HCl <=> CaCl + oxalic acid Hence we are describing an equilibrium, a balance which will be determined by the presence of each ingredient in the reaction. This changes throughout the gastrointestinal tract, so whilst HCl is abundant in the stomach, this is not the case in the intestines and so the reaction would be expected to go in the reverse direction. Dissociation constants and a variety of calculations which I've long since forgotten would determine the extent to which this occurs. Upon further inquiries however it appears that the first premise of my original argument (that oxalic acid is not absorbed in the stomach) may be invalidated in the light of more recent scientific investigations. You may care to look at this interesting article: http://www.cmj.org/information/full.asp?id=1372 Of note, they suggest that The stomach is usually thought to be a digestive but not an absorptive organ, therefore it is often overlooked that the strong acidic environment within the stomach helps oxalates dissolve into oxalic acids making them easier to absorb. Theoretically the stomach is an ideal oxalate absorption site. Calcium and oxalic acid easily bind together in the alkalis environment of the small intestine making oxalate absorption more difficult. Their studies seemed to indicate that the stomach does indeed have a quite significant role in oxalic acid absorbtion, which depending on how significant this is, could make the gastric inactivation of calcium as a chloride salt a mute point to begin with. In the acidic environment of the stomach the oxalic acid would be availabe in its free form and would be absorbed. Calcium and chloride would be doing their own thing off in the corner somewhere So in the end we return to the original point - why would drinking milk or giving calcium salts serve any function in preventing excessive oxalate absorption. I can suggest two points - 1) Concentrated oxalic acid ingestion would burn the mucous membranes of the mouth and oesophagous. A glass of milk would neutralise the toxin until it reached the stomach at least preventing further local destruction of these sensative membranes. The stomach can handle acids - that's it job. The oxalic acid will do no harm here but once absorbed would go on to form calcium oxalate which would precipitate out in the kidneys causing renal problems. 2) Assuming oxalic acid absorption in the stomach is not complete and that some makes it through to the small intestine, an alkaline environment, then we can expect the reaction Calcium Oxalate + HCl <=> CaCl + oxalic acid to start going bacwards and any calcium oxalate formed through the process would be eliminated through the faeces. Hence a reasonable calcium intake would prevent at least some oxalic acid absorption. There's probably a lot more to the story than we are yet to understand. Given that oxalate and oxalic acid are present in all green leafy vegetables to some extent: vegetables which we've co-evoled with, then its questionable just how important these findings are. If however someone were inclined to have the odd munch on some wood sorrel (oxalis acetosella), new zealand sea spinach (Tetragonia tetragonoides) or indulge in the cultivated spinach to the extent which the fictional character pop-eye might, then they may be getting a bit more oxalic acid than they bargained for. I remember from a while back now, a chemistry teacher using the oxalic acid / kidney stones argument as an excuse for not having to eat his greens!

Anthraquinone glycosides may also have some involvement in rhubarb poisonings. Although you may need to eat a large amount of these plants to have any immediately life threatening effects from the oxalic acid, it is something to take into consideration if you had kidney problems or a disease like osteoporosis. I would imagine that you would not absorb much oxalic acid in the acidic environment of the stomach. Following this reasoning, if it were to make it into the small intestine, a relatively alkaline environment, it would, once there bind with any available calcium and safely find its way out of the south end of the human were it heading north. Hence, prevented from entering the systemic circulation, the toxin would be unable to exert its deleterious effects on the kidneys.

Just remember not to have any alcohol with them.

It will end the terror of having to look for your visa card. Just think - you could have all your credit card details, medicare details, in fact your entire health and psychiatric history compiled on a single card which after being whisked through a few magnetic fields would reveal a wealth of information about us which the police could use to help us lead safer, terror free lives. Think of the convenience. I'm only worried I might lose the thing or leave it at home. Maybe it would be easier just to stamp us with barcodes or impregnate us with radio emitting devices.

How about for an ad they could have a group of freaked out looking party goers standing around an unconscious body lying on the floor. A pair of ambulance workers enter in with a stretcher and ask "do you know if he's had anything" and then, from the crowd, someone volunteers "he just had some red bull, mate ..." I reckon their sales would go through the roof!