Maggots won’t eat the bodies of smokers
Apparently the nicotine-ridden flesh of cigarette smokers is so vile that maggots may refuse to feed on the corpses of deceased smokers. If you’re a smoker, I am not sure which is worse – having to pay $11 for a pack of cigarettes in NYC, or knowing that animals that otherwise feast on rotting flesh consider you repulsive. Gag a maggot indeed.
Related posts:
- One Starbucks Venti® Coffee a day will reverse Alzheimer’s
- Stricter guns laws equal fewer gun related deaths. Duh.
18 Comments to “Maggots won’t eat the bodies of smokers”
Leave a Reply
Maggots won?t eat the bodies of smokers…
I found your entry interesting do I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog
…
i for one am glad maggots don’t want to eat me.
Nicotine is a pesticide. Congratulations on blowing the lid off this groundbreaking story.
hahah yeah nicotine is a pesticide……. good job.
Indeed, nicotine is a toxin that can be used as a pesticide. The point of the experiment described in New Scientist (link below) and in the video is that the bodies of smokers may decompose differently to non-smokers because of the presence of nicotine. If you’re a forensic scientist, that is indeed groundbreaking and extremely helpful news. /desnark
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19109-nicotine-and-pigs-trotters-the-latest-csi-toolkit.html
Sooooo nasty! Maggots have more sense than smokers!
[...] 25262728293031 Powered by LiveJournal.com Maggots won't eat the bodies of smokers Apparently the nicotine-ridden flesh of cigarettes smokers is so vile that maggots may refuse to feed on the corpses of deceased smokers. With maggot-ridden video.Source:http://www.scienceduck.com/2010/07/01/maggots-wont-eat-the-bodies-of-smokers/ [...]
yeah…. really groundbreaking. fark pwns.
The original article was indeed interesting. If the sanctimonious commentary in this post had been replaced with a little bit of the actual intent of the study it would have been fine.
@mightypez yes, i agree, why talk about the price of cigarettes in nyc? how is that even applicable? i still don’t buy that this has any importance due to the fact that yes, smokers will have nicotine in their blood and organs…. a PESTICIDE!
@MightyPez I am not sure too many folks would have cared about this study if the post had been titled “Forensic entomologists now able to more accurately predict postmortem interval thanks to nicotine injected pig carcasses.” Sometimes a bit of humor helps get folks excited about science stuff.
@smart – importance for forensic science is described in this article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19109-nicotine-and-pigs-trotters-the-latest-csi-toolkit.html
So the science isn’t interesting unless you can make it inflammatory? That’s an odd stance for a science blog.
MightyPez: true. Naked Science and Effin’ Science that try to do the same thing since we all got bored with Mythbusters five years ago lol.
TheDuck: Interesting article, especially if you place it in the context of the article you linked to in your snarky reply. Just include that next time and you won’t have to be a duck about it in the comments
I think (hope) ‘inflammatory’ is not the right word. I was going for ‘funny’, which is the vibe I am hoping most folks got from this little post.
@The Duck: Keeping people interested in science is important. I think by adding a headline and some snark, then linking to the actual article is good practice. As long as snark is not involved in the science itself, it’s fine to find a way to catch people’s interest.
[...] … when maggots will not even touch your rotting corpse. [...]
Wow, interesting read! Never thought that smoker’s flesh was so tainted that maggots do not accept it.
Saves on embalming fluid.