Chillax, cranky commentards: Anger can KILL YOU A new study has shown that within the first two hours after an angry outburst, you're five times more likely to suffer a heart attack and four times more likely to have a stroke than if you had kept your cool. To reach this conclusion, a trio of researchers from Boston's Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center performed a " …
"There are several limitations to the analyses that the authors acknowledge. The small number of available studies to include in the meta-analysis and their significant heterogeneity speaks to a paucity of overall evidence in this area and substantially complicates the interpretation of their pooled estimates. In addition, given the relatively consistent findings across studies and the difficulty in combining their results using meta-analytic techniques, it is unclear whether combining studies that used such disparate methods provides incrementally more additional information than the individual studies alone."
Of the nine studies, only one has a decent sample size. The studies can't be aggregated or compared. The rest of this meta-analysis is just padding.
Who gets emotional over movies? They're just images on a screen.
Who gets emotional over plays? They're just dressed-up people on stage.
Who gets emotional over spoken words? They're just noise coming from the flapping gums of your inferiors.
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, it turns out that human beings communicate with each other through a variety of media, of which the "written" word (now taking the form of text on screens as well as ink on paper) is but one. PROTIP: people often have emotional reactions to things they read, regardless of the specific medium via which those words are conveyed.
PS: I get pissed off when people try to be all arty farty and get up their own backsides trying to use clever phrases they've noted down waiting for the chance to use them. It's not original anymore, why don't you just say bears shit in the woods?
However that comes a distant third to those who finish with "end of" and the worst of the lot "simples".
This post has been deleted by its author
@ Chris: "PS: I get pissed off when" would seem to be a textbook example of what is being discussed. After all, should you really be getting that agitated because somebody is using the smart-ass word for "bear"? Just relax. Simples! In the long run, it really doesn't matter. End of. Oh, oops.
When will you lot learn? The Dailymail has some of the best authors of any red top. They know what to write to get the response they want from the readership and allow through only the comments that act as catalysts for said reaction. Take for example the price of a house, someone dies they mention the price of their house and there are hundreds of comments about it not being relevant, beautiful and so predictable almost like being on here. Story about Dixons and I know there will be comments about them not deserving to be trading, how as a foetus someone reset the password on the demo machines and the shop assistant didn't know what to do and loads of other hilarious jests played on the staff.
Actually I agree. The Daily Mail is a brilliantly put together product. It's designed to get its readerships' blood boiling ever so often. Along with news, celeb stories, human interest type stuff etc. I believe they've been the paper that's lost the least circulation consistently for the last decade. So they're doing something right.
Personally I hate reading it. Sadly a whole bunch of the editorial staff seem to have gone off to the Telegraph, and taken that in a similar direction.
whats f***ed my heart up
All I really need then is a beautiful stress free day without any cares in the world, and to imagine a clear blue lake, reflecting the clouds in sky as they drift past, and I look down into the lake and watch the annoying little f***er drown who blew up one of my robots at 3.35pm resulting in me having to do an emergency rebuild that takes 90 mins while the boss screams about line downtime.!!!!!
AAAAAAAAAARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhh <thud>
serotonin-release inhibitors
Serotonin reuptake inhibitors, surely, were prescribed in a (failed) attempt to reduce stress for heart-attack survivors? I've never heard of anyone being prescribed a serotonin release inhibitor, and while such drugs might exist, they certainly don't seem to be commonly used. There are conditions in which you want to reduce the effectivity of serotonin - generally for antiemitic purposes - but the pharmacological approach seems to be receptor antagonists and not some mechanism for interfering with release.
And, of course, SRIs (particularly SSRIs like Prozac, Celexa, etc) enjoyed a period of huge popularity in the 1990s, and were prescribed for pretty much everything. They're still widely prescribed, of course, though the public fascination has died down.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
