When I first saw this I was very surprised. (Why wouldn't an Eastern European speak five languages?) But I spent an evening obsessively going through youtube trying to find proof that she did speak Italian and French beyond the smidgeon of these languages show here (the video producer discusses this) and could find no evidence that she does. This seems to be true.
Friday, May 11, 2018
Saturday, February 27, 2016
Thursday, December 24, 2015
The evil number four
http://www.rennie.com/ra/news/568-no-more-skipping-4-13-14-24-in-vancouver-floor-numbers/568#.VnwhaPkrLIVhttp://www.rennie.com/ra/news/568-no-more-skipping-4-13-14-24-in-vancouver-floor-numbers/568#.VnwhaPkrLIV
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21679535-fear-itself-nothing-fear
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
Did Marilyn Monroe get a rib removed to appear more slender?
I seem to be on a skepticism kick. I am, it seems, slightly obsessed lately with trying to correct false statements and debunk rumors --perhaps even fight a little bit of hysteria. Of course, this is what I was strongly into in the '90s, back when I wrote the two "Scams from the Great Beyond" books. (Books I intend to put back in print, soon, I hope. But it's actually not that high on the agenda.) We'll see how long this lasts.
In the meantime, I recently heard a claim that Marilyn Monroe had two of her ribs removed in order to make herself more slender and attractive. I found this a little difficult to accept as, although I make no claims at being an expert, I've read two books on Marilyn, both collections of interesting essays, as well as the occasional magazine and newspaper article, as well as portions of her on-line FBI files. (Yes, the FBI kept files on Marilyn Monroe, particularly after and during her marriage to Arthur Miller. They make fascinating reading, particularly since they are so creepy and invasive and were done at taxpayer expense by an organization that I wish had a more admirable history.) At one point, I did a very cursory investigation into her death (somewhat superficial. I only used public, published secondary sources and not the original documents), and found this fascinating too. (And for those interested, my impression is that there was something wrong with the investigation, but it doesn't necessarily imply suicide or a murder cover up, although I don't deny these as possibilities. It seems that her two doctors had not always communicated well and one theory is that they'd accidentally between the two of them over prescribed drugs, and the authorities wished to cover it up.) She was a fascinating woman, paradoxical and intriguing in many ways. Despite this reading, I'd never heard such a thing as a story of Marilyn Monroe having her ribs removed.
Therefore I did a bit of on-line research. Although I don't consider it definitive, there are at least two strong arguments that Marilyn Monroe never had a rib removed.
First, according to an article in Vogue on stomach slimming surgical practices, plastic surgeon, John E. Sherman of Cornell Medical School, says that the surgical practice of rib removal for cosmetic reasons has never, to the best of his knowledge, ever actually been done, ever. He also says that it would be a very dangerous operation as the ribs are near the lungs.
Says the Vogue article
"As far as the won't die rumors about movie stars (Rachel Welch, Cher) having their lower ribs removed to make for a smaller waist, Sherman insists that he's never heard of such an operation actually taking place. "I'm sure, because people always bring it up, that someone's done it, somewhere," he says. "But there's never been anything published about it; no one has ever owned up to performing such a procedure, much less to having had one. To risk your life - your ribs are right there up against your lung tissue - for what would be a relatively minor change in aesthetics would be crazy."
That seems pretty definitive.
Secondly, Marilyn Monroe's autopsy report has been released to the public. Although I've made no effort to seek out a copy of the original document, one website does claim to have published the autopsy report on-line. The autopsy report does not mention any missing ribs.
Instead, the relevant portion states the following:
"Skeletomuscular system: The clavicle, ribs, vertebrae and pelvic bones show fracture lines. All bones of the extremities are examined by palpation showing no evidence of fracture."
In the meantime, I recently heard a claim that Marilyn Monroe had two of her ribs removed in order to make herself more slender and attractive. I found this a little difficult to accept as, although I make no claims at being an expert, I've read two books on Marilyn, both collections of interesting essays, as well as the occasional magazine and newspaper article, as well as portions of her on-line FBI files. (Yes, the FBI kept files on Marilyn Monroe, particularly after and during her marriage to Arthur Miller. They make fascinating reading, particularly since they are so creepy and invasive and were done at taxpayer expense by an organization that I wish had a more admirable history.) At one point, I did a very cursory investigation into her death (somewhat superficial. I only used public, published secondary sources and not the original documents), and found this fascinating too. (And for those interested, my impression is that there was something wrong with the investigation, but it doesn't necessarily imply suicide or a murder cover up, although I don't deny these as possibilities. It seems that her two doctors had not always communicated well and one theory is that they'd accidentally between the two of them over prescribed drugs, and the authorities wished to cover it up.) She was a fascinating woman, paradoxical and intriguing in many ways. Despite this reading, I'd never heard such a thing as a story of Marilyn Monroe having her ribs removed.
Therefore I did a bit of on-line research. Although I don't consider it definitive, there are at least two strong arguments that Marilyn Monroe never had a rib removed.
First, according to an article in Vogue on stomach slimming surgical practices, plastic surgeon, John E. Sherman of Cornell Medical School, says that the surgical practice of rib removal for cosmetic reasons has never, to the best of his knowledge, ever actually been done, ever. He also says that it would be a very dangerous operation as the ribs are near the lungs.
Says the Vogue article
"As far as the won't die rumors about movie stars (Rachel Welch, Cher) having their lower ribs removed to make for a smaller waist, Sherman insists that he's never heard of such an operation actually taking place. "I'm sure, because people always bring it up, that someone's done it, somewhere," he says. "But there's never been anything published about it; no one has ever owned up to performing such a procedure, much less to having had one. To risk your life - your ribs are right there up against your lung tissue - for what would be a relatively minor change in aesthetics would be crazy."
That seems pretty definitive.
Secondly, Marilyn Monroe's autopsy report has been released to the public. Although I've made no effort to seek out a copy of the original document, one website does claim to have published the autopsy report on-line. The autopsy report does not mention any missing ribs.
Instead, the relevant portion states the following:
"Skeletomuscular system: The clavicle, ribs, vertebrae and pelvic bones show fracture lines. All bones of the extremities are examined by palpation showing no evidence of fracture."
Finally, and one of the reasons that Marilyn Monroe interests me is the way in which a human being was transformed, transformed both into a blonde comic sex icon, interesting since she was not a natural blonde, nor terribly happy mor reportedly able to truly enjoy sex (it was reportedly late in life that she thanked her psychiatrist for teaching her how to achieve orgasm), and as part of this has lost all privacy, both in life and in death, Marilyn Monroe's 1954 x-rays were reportedly recently put up for sale at public auction. Of course, this only shows that she'd maintained all her ribs at a point in time nine years before her death, but all the ribs do appear to be present.
In an effort to combat misinformation and lies, therefore, I share this image of Marilyn Monroe as you've never seen her before. Note how she posed with her hands on her hips. All the best, and take care.
Peter Huston
Note: This oriiginally appeared at http://peterhuston.blogspot.com/2012/09/did-marilyn-monroe-get-rib-removed-to.html on September 6, 2012
Controversies in Chinese history -- Opium controversies
Although we've never met, Frank Dikotter is a Chinese history scholar whose work I have always enjoyed and appreciated. He writes well, has an interesting perspective, chooses interesting subjects, and cites and researches well.
Which brings me to his work, Narcotic Culture, A history of drugs in China (2004, University of Chicago Press ). Now don't get me wrong. As I write this I'm still reeling from an interaction with a lying drug addict that cost me a great deal of aggravation, expense, and legal hassles, so I am absolutely not soft on drugs. Quite frankly, I've even got a problem with all this emphasis and money used for getting naloxene in to the hands of people who might come across a narcotics overdose victim. I mean, which part of "don't try heroin. It's bad for you," did they not understand? Is it really necessary to work to save them? Might the world be better off without them?
But having said that, Dikotter has some interesting perspectives on the traditional portrayal of opium use in traditional, early modern China. (Say the 17th century AD and on.)
Controversy Number One --"Was China victimized by foreign governments and business interests who poisoned their spirit and nation with a previously unknown drug called opum, a highly addictive substance that served no purpose but to poison the hearts and minds of the Chinese people?"
According to Dikotter, "In Southeast Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and Europe, it was primarily used as a painkiller before the discovery of aspirin or penicilin in the twentieth century. Opium was extremely effective in fighting fever, blocking dysentery, relieving pain, suppressing coughs, and abating hunger. negative represnations often confused the medical symptoms of the diseases against which opium was taken as a palliative with the imagined physiological effects of 'addiction." (Dikotter, p. 3, by the way, I have no idea why he put "addiction" in quotes. Remember kids, only losers try heroin. Seriously.)
Controversy Number Two --"Opium was an exotic drug, used primarily, almost exclusively in the far east and should be associated with that region and the insidious vices of its exotic cultures and peoples."
According to Dikotter. "Historians of China rarely mention that any respectable person in Europe or America could walk into a pharmacy in 1900 and routinely buy a range of hashish pastes, exotic psychedelics, or morphine (complemented by a handy injection kit), and that opium products were widely on sale in Britain." (Again, Dikotter, page 3),
Of course, Dikotter discusses these issues more fully.
(And a tip of the hat to Sherman Cochrane, my advisor at Cornell, whose classes on controversies in Chinese history helped prepare me more fully for digging deeper and exploring the field and its issues.)
Which brings me to his work, Narcotic Culture, A history of drugs in China (2004, University of Chicago Press ). Now don't get me wrong. As I write this I'm still reeling from an interaction with a lying drug addict that cost me a great deal of aggravation, expense, and legal hassles, so I am absolutely not soft on drugs. Quite frankly, I've even got a problem with all this emphasis and money used for getting naloxene in to the hands of people who might come across a narcotics overdose victim. I mean, which part of "don't try heroin. It's bad for you," did they not understand? Is it really necessary to work to save them? Might the world be better off without them?
But having said that, Dikotter has some interesting perspectives on the traditional portrayal of opium use in traditional, early modern China. (Say the 17th century AD and on.)
Controversy Number One --"Was China victimized by foreign governments and business interests who poisoned their spirit and nation with a previously unknown drug called opum, a highly addictive substance that served no purpose but to poison the hearts and minds of the Chinese people?"
According to Dikotter, "In Southeast Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and Europe, it was primarily used as a painkiller before the discovery of aspirin or penicilin in the twentieth century. Opium was extremely effective in fighting fever, blocking dysentery, relieving pain, suppressing coughs, and abating hunger. negative represnations often confused the medical symptoms of the diseases against which opium was taken as a palliative with the imagined physiological effects of 'addiction." (Dikotter, p. 3, by the way, I have no idea why he put "addiction" in quotes. Remember kids, only losers try heroin. Seriously.)
Controversy Number Two --"Opium was an exotic drug, used primarily, almost exclusively in the far east and should be associated with that region and the insidious vices of its exotic cultures and peoples."
According to Dikotter. "Historians of China rarely mention that any respectable person in Europe or America could walk into a pharmacy in 1900 and routinely buy a range of hashish pastes, exotic psychedelics, or morphine (complemented by a handy injection kit), and that opium products were widely on sale in Britain." (Again, Dikotter, page 3),
Of course, Dikotter discusses these issues more fully.
(And a tip of the hat to Sherman Cochrane, my advisor at Cornell, whose classes on controversies in Chinese history helped prepare me more fully for digging deeper and exploring the field and its issues.)
Scientists look at Mesoamerican Cannibalism, find new recipes.
According to an article in the May 20, 2015 issue of Forbes, archeologist have taken a collection of cooked human remains and subjected them to a variety of chemical tests. The results were a better understanding of not just the herbs and spices used to cook humans, but also the actual cooking methods. The results of the study were originally published in the May 20 issue of the academic journal, Archeometry.
The article was co-authored by A Trujillo-Mederos, P. Bosch, C. Pijoan,and J.Mansilla, and entitled, Savoury Recipes and the Colour of the Tlatelcomila Human Bones
Archeometry, the publishing journal, summarized the article as follows:
Bones from Tlatelcomila (Tetelpan, México D.F.) were characterized by several complementary physical and chemical techniques, such as X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, energy-dispersive spectroscopy and ultraviolet spectroscopy, to determine whether they were boiled or grilled. The usual correlation between thermal treatment and colour is revisited in terms of microscopic structure, morphology and texture. At temperatures less than 100°C, it is shown that colour depends not only on temperature or diagenesis but also on the cooking procedure; that is, on the presence of spice dyestuffs such as axiote (Bixa orellana) or chilli (Capsicum).
There is no word yet on how people who idealize Native American cultures and indigenous peoples have reacted.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/05/20/ancient-mesoamerican-recipe-for-cooking-human-flesh-decoded-by-archaeologists/
Forbes link: 10 Ancient Secrets Human Bones Spilled In 2015
A collection of fascinating, yet gruesome stories from this years news dealing with "bioarcheology" and the study of dead things and dead people.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinakillgrove/2015/12/22/10-ancient-secrets-human-bones-spilled-2015/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)