Ozzy Osbourne To Be Genetically Decoded 256
Dashiva Dan writes "DNA research lab Knome has announced that it is going to sequence Ozzy's entire genome. Ozzy, the former lead singer of Black Sabbath, reality television star, and spokesman for World of Warcraft among many other things, has been selected so they can discover, among other things, how drugs are absorbed in the body. The amount of abuse Ozzy has put himself through and survived is a large part of why he was chosen."
Survived? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. Like that's costing them $10K retail. (Score:5, Insightful)
Congratulations to Knome on a PR scheme that's getting them mainstream advertising for almost no money [ksl.com]. I haven't seen this much bogosity from actual scientists since they shot John Glenn into space [google.com] to "learn about the effects on space on old people".
I'm sure they'll find the drug abuse resistance gene in no time. (Which seems like a really priority scientific endeavor.)
Will their next genetic decoding involve LiLo? TMZ wants to know.
Re:Survived? (Score:5, Insightful)
He's more coherent than a lot of younger meth or crack users out there.
Spokesman for WoW? (Score:1, Insightful)
He didn't really speak in that commercial unless you count mumbling.
Re:Do they have any of his old DNA (Score:0, Insightful)
I thought DNA doesn't change? Guess I was wrong ...
This isn't the only reason he was chosen (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure publicity is the number one reason. For Ozzy or Knome? I'm not sure. But I can tell you that if they wanted a candidate who has taken great "bodily abuse" from drugs or whatever, they'd have no trouble finding one who isn't a high profile personality.
Re:Survived? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think Keith Richards qualifies for that; is he being decoded as well?
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Survived? (Score:5, Insightful)
"is he being decoded as well?"
He's already pickled; they can wait and do that at any time.
Re:Wow. Like that's costing them $10K retail. (Score:2, Insightful)
Will their next genetic decoding involve LiLo? TMZ wants to know.
Why would anyone want to genetically decode LiLo? Isn't everyone using Grub by now?
Re:Do they have any of his old DNA (Score:1, Insightful)
Just can't see hot street drugs; radio-laced material is too valuable on its own market. I suppose those Chernobyl poppies maybe, or maybe organics around Krasnoyarsk.
I want my DNA decoded too.. (Score:2, Insightful)
because I think metal, eat metal, breathe metal and metal is runnin' around my brain. I want to know the exact mutations Ozzy has caused in my DNA (for free of course, cause during the decades I've paid the required fees embedded in the 45ers, LPs, CDs, VHS, Betamax and DVDs of His Divine Music.)
I also want my kids examined, because I fear that I've not been a good father and some of these mutations have escaped me (my son worships Shakira and my daughter is hooked on some weird German punk group called Johann Sebastian Bach). Amen.
Re:Survived? (Score:5, Insightful)
makes one wonder how it would have worked out, had it been sold next to alcohol.
Re:Ozzy osbourne, marilyn manson. the 'scare' (Score:3, Insightful)
Manson is pop, he's hardly a logical legacy for Ozzy. Manson is one step further down the wierd train than Lady GaGa, and it's not a big step.
Re:The secret to his DNA revealed (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it has. He has been dead twice, and come back twice. That's more than Jesus.
Re:Survived? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's right, our biggest addiction rates came from the men in "clean white coats".... but it was all legal.
[...]
The biggest aid in bringing down both the addiction rate, and cleaning up the quality of drugs? A government law. The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which prohibited the consumption of opiates without a prescription.
Presumably, obtaining a prescription would not have been very hard if, as you argue, doctors were so keen on giving morphine to their patients. I think your post is quite self-contradictory. If the large addiction rates came from men in clean white coats, then the Food and Drug Act would not have made any difference. Might it not be like OHSA, i.e. the law came into force as other factors were influencing drug use/workplace safety and did not directly cause any change? Could it not indicate that, by 1906, people, including the government, had realized the risks associated with the use of morphine and were becoming less willing to use it? This would make a lot of sense since the Act was only passed *after* journalists wrote scathing articles about the patent medicine industry. Another element that bears this out is that Coca Cola stopped including cocaine in its beverage in 1903.
Furthermore, the Act did not even prohibit the consumption of opiates without a prescription. Rather, it imposed mandatory labeling requirements for drugs and food containing alcohol, opiates, etc. Most of the rules laid out in the Act are common sense rules that are simply meant to prevent fraud and ensure that individuals can give informed consent before taking a drug. Seems a lot better than assuming that people can't make the right decision when they are presented with all the facts. My point of view is that drug abuse and alcoholism were rampant in the 19th and early 20th century because standards of living were much lower, many diseases that are now considered minor inconveniences could kill you, and, for many people, life was overall much less enjoyable than it is now. Given these constraints, it is understandable that these people would have different time preferences than we do and favor present enjoyment (i.e. getting high, smoking, etc.) over future benefits.