#we cannot predict the future and that includes if we will be forgotten. we never know

[uncanny-tranny]

You know, I don't necessarily buy into the idea of "you die twice; once when your heart stops beating, and the second when you are forgotten" because I don't think we're truly forgotten.

Throughout history, we've found proof of people existing, well after their death, well after they've been forgotten by their community and time. Even if we do not have names for these people, we know they were alive. We touch their bones, and we internalize their lives. We learn how they lived through the stories we interpret from their bones, and then we tell others about them. They haven't been forgotten, and it's not unlikely that you won't be forgotten.

Why is it that we only "count" if we are immortalized in the history books, if we scar time to the point nothing would be the same if we were forgotten?

And, anyway, look at this cat, who died so long ago, but whose memory is still remembered:

#positivity #described images #image description in alt #death tw #this was partially to show off buffins because he's adorable <3 #i always get so emotional looking at these old photos of animals just knowing they are physically not here anymore #but i am so grateful to have known they were physically alive once #and the same is said for humans #i cannot believe that we die ever in a permanent and true and final way #and maybe that is 'too hopeful' but i don't care🩷💛 #we cannot predict the future and that includes if we will be forgotten. we never know

[the-witty-pen-name]

Love is Blind (Part 3)

Eddie Munson x PlusSize!F!Reader

Summary: In a last ditch effort to evade the normal disappointments of dating, a group of misfits desperate to have someone see who they are on the inside volunteer for the most recent brain chemistry study at Hawkins Lab. 

Word Count: 2.9k

Warnings: 18+ ONLY, smut in later parts (part 4), reader has low self-esteem and struggles with self love/acceptance, anxiety/trauma related to bullying, tooth rot worthy fluff, Eddie being a major flirt, cursing, mentions of substance use, descriptions of bullying & people being jerks but like also very overdone tropes, mentions of smut

A/N: Please let me know if you liked it!! Feel free to send me an ask if you want to fangirl with me over these two because I cannot stand them at this point. LOL Or if you want to share any ideas/predictions for upcoming parts with me or other ideas for future stories with Eddie, I would love to hear them. Also, if I forgot to include a warning that should be included, please let me know!

Series Masterlist

“Eddie.” 

“Hey, Eddie.” 

“Earth to Eddie.”

“EDDIE.” 

“Shit! Sorry,” he says, breaking out of his thoughts and coming back to reality. He stares at his notes in his DM folder and he literally has no idea where the campaign has left off. He clears his throat and awkwardly flips through the pages. “Umm..”

“We just made it to the fishing town and we were tasked by a local merchant to kill a sea serpent that’s poisoning the local fish in exchange for..”

“Oh yeah,” he interjects, grabbing the correct script he needs to continue. “Uh, did you roll..?”

“Are you kidding me, man! What the hell?” Gareth exclaims, exasperated. “What’s wrong with you today?” 

Eddie’s face turns pink, shaking his head and ignoring the question. He was not going to admit to being distracted. He’s not embarrassed to talk to the guys about you, but he hasn’t told anyone he signed up for the study. He didn’t want to admit he was desperate or lonely, he’s too proud. He knows his friends don’t care, but it’s a mental block he can’t pass. 

“Nothing, I’m good. Just let it go,” he says defensively. 

“No way. Fucking spill it,” Jeff laughs. 

Eddie racks his mind for the most sane way to answer their questions. He sighs, pushing a mess of his curly hair out of his face. 

“Who is she?” Gareth asks, raising an eyebrow. 

***

DAY FOUR

“I’m mad at you,” Eddie says, and you roll your eyes. 

“What did I do now?” You ask, playful sarcasm evident in your voice. 

“You’re throwing me off my game”

“I don’t even know what you mean by that.” 

“Obviously because I’m really cool and popular,” he jokes, “I’m a Dungeon Master as you know.” 

“Yup, I’m familiar,” you toy. 

“My friends called my ass out so many times last night for not paying attention and I kept fucking up.” 

“I don’t appreciate you pinning this on me,” you chuckle. “I didn’t do anything.”

“Lies!” He says in a bravado. “You are the distraction! You have managed to weasel your way into every aspect of mind- I hope you’re proud of yourself. I’m probably going to be dethroned. My reign is over.”

You bite your bottom lip, to hold back the goofy smile you know is creeping over your whole face. Never before has anyone made you feel like this. The notebook to keep track of other “dates” is long forgotten. You only want to continue talking to Eddie. You wonder if any of the other people you spoke to felt a connection this strong. You’re dying to know if there are other people who feel as good as you right now. 

“What were you thinking about?” you ask shyly. You can hear the way it makes Eddie stop in his tracks. You assume he wears some sort of chain on his pants cause you can hear it when he paces, but suddenly, his end of the wall falls silent.

“How honest do you want me to be?” he asks, suddenly sounding shy. 

“What do you mean by that?”

“Well, I could go the cheesy, romantic, ‘I was thinking about you’ way- which is true. Or, I could be brutally honest because ‘I was thinking about you’ in this context has much more implications than that.” 

“You’re confusing me,” you laugh, “just tell me.”

“Do you ever fantasize about when we get out of here? In like, a you know-”

“Like sexually?” you ask, throwing him a bone. He was drowning. 

“Yeah,” he admits, and you can hear the chain on his pant leg as he fidgets. 

“Yes,” you answer honestly, “I do.”

“I think about it all the time,” he says, the confession spilling out, “The fact that I can’t touch you is driving me fucking insane. It’s not even like just like the thought of getting to fuck you- it’s like being close to you and like feeling your body heat, or like the weight of you sitting on my lap, what it feels like to just touch your skin- just everything that we’re being denied. I don’t even have a visual in my head to go off of it’s just like- I don’t know, man…”

You wince at the mention of sitting on his lap. “I don’t know if you’d want me on your lap for a long time..,” you sound defeated. 

“Um, don’t speak for me,” he cuts you off, playfully. “Any man who doesn’t want the full weight of his woman on his lap is a fucking idiot. Ugh, I don’t even think you understand just how amazing it is. I don’t care if you try to fight me on this, princess. You’re sitting on me, and I will love every second of it.” 

“I’m not thin, Eddie,” you whisper, feeling defeated. You hear him blow a raspberry and then he knocks on the wall. 

“I… don’t… care,” he emphasizes by drawing out each word. “You need to believe me. I couldn’t care less about your weight, your height, your hair… whatever  it is. I like you! And that means I like every part of you.”

His voice begins to raise, like he is yelling up, “If these fuckers would realize we’re done already and let me out.” He then lowers his voice like he’s looking back to the wall. “I want you. The experiment fucking works, I wish I could show you what you do to me cause maybe then it’ll finally stick. I’m going out of my mind that I can’t touch you and show you how much I want you, your body, everything. Do you need me to spell it out?” 

“Would you have still found me attractive if we met outside of this experiment?” you ask, “I bet you wouldn’t have even looked my way if you saw me at a bar or something.”

“Sweetheart,” he coaxes, “absolutely. I know that I would’ve been annoying the shit out of you for your number. You’d have been the one to reject me, I guarantee it.” 

“I would have never,” you reply. 

“So if it’s possible for you to know that you wouldn't have rejected me without seeing me,” Eddie muses, “why can’t you believe the same for me?”

“You haven’t asked me a single thing about my appearance,” he continues, “Do you care how much I weigh? Do you care if I’m short?”

“Not at all. I haven’t thought about it,” you admit. 

“I haven’t either. Now, please let me have my fantasy of you sitting on my lap please,” he whines, “I need something to get me through the day, Christ.” You laugh at his fake annoyance. 

You’re so happy at how he’s able to talk you down. It amazes you how he’s able to see through the insecurities and brings you back down to Earth. 

“Okay, okay,” you say, settling back into the couch and getting comfortable. You rest your head back. 

“I don’t know, basically, we’re in the middle of the campaign- I literally spent weeks writing it,” he continues, “and I literally just can’t stop thinking about how amazing it would be if you were there. I’m just sitting there, thinking about what it would feel like to just have you sitting on my lap while we’re playing and then I’m thinking about how I want to feel lean back on me and I’d have my arm around your waist holding you, and maybe I’d rub little circles on the side of your thigh and I thought about how soft you probably feel and then suddenly I’m sporting the most embarrassing boner which thankfully no one saw- Fuck, this is what you’re doing to me.”

***

“Is there any way to end the trial early?” Eddie asks, sitting in the interview room. There’s a man putting a pulse oximeter on his right index finger and another testing his blood pressure with a monitor on his left side. 

Two other technicians sit across from Eddie, taking notes from Eddie’s answers on a clipboard. They have tested his levels of dopamine and norepinephrine. They’re taking extensive notes on Eddie’s physical reactions to you, and the same is done to all of the candidates- including you. They continue to ignore Eddie’s questions as they ramble on about his levels of oxytocin. 

“In order for us to gather all of the information necessary, this isn’t possible,” one of them finally answers. 

“But I’m telling you how I feel- I’m telling you it works,” he insists. 

“Mr. Muson,” one says, closing a file folder that contains his charts. “This is a study in brain chemistry. You agreed to participate for the designated number of days and in exchange you’d receive compensation. Your conversations between yourself and the other candidates is not our business, nor what you choose to do afterwards. Our job here is to collect data, not the details of your personal life.” 

“I can’t believe this,” he scoffs, rolling his eyes. He pulls off the oximeter and grabs his jean jacket. He walks out, despite their protests, flipping them off as he goes. He couldn’t care less about the lousy $200. As far as he was concerned, they poked and prodded the two of you enough. 

Of course, he did show up the next day. Promptly with a big grin on his face, he walked in with a happy go-lucky attitude that the entire lab team was secretly sick of dealing with. These sudden outbursts and dramatic tirades were becoming a staple of Eddie’s interviews and they equally couldn’t wait to be done with him. 

***

DAY FIVE

“Are these dice?” You ask with a chuckle, opening the small, black velvet bag that’s been left for you on the table in the room. You empty the bag out into your hand and watch as the dice roll into your palm one at a time. They’re all red and shimmer as you move them around in your cupped hand. 

“Well, I wanted you to have them,” you hear his voice explain from the other side of the wall. You’re beaming as you carefully pour them back into the bag and tie it off. 

“This is so sweet, Eds,” you marvel. “I love them.” 

“I also brought my guitar and like in a non-douchebag way I was kind of hoping to play something for you,” he says, his guitar perched on his lap. “I’ve just been working on this song and I wanted your opinion on it.” 

It's surprisingly soft sounding. You were expecting heavy guitar, something really metal based on what Eddie has told you about his music taste and his band. It’s slower paced, like a dreamy, slow rock ballad. 

You wished you could see him, observe how he looks when he’s concentrating or how his fingers look strumming against the cords. You just know he has the most beautiful hands. You imagine his fingers and try to visualize them flexing as he strums. You’re so distracted by it that you almost miss him singing a verse. 

“It’s not done yet,” he prefaces, still strumming. “I’m still working on the lyrics so don’t think too much about them, just like the meaning and the melody you know?” 

“Yeah totally,” you hum in agreement. “I think it sounds great.” He smiles at the praise. 

***

Before

You anxiously sit by the front window, peeking out between the blinds occasionally. You smooth out the skirt of the new dress your mom bought you, and you make sure your hair is still how you requested. Your mom let you wear makeup and you picked eyeshadow that matches your dress and you feel like a million bucks. It’s your ninth grade formal, and the star of the JV basketball team asked you to be his date. 

The minutes tick by and the time changes from reasonably late to stood up. You still hold out hope, and reject your parents' offers to just drive you to the dance. It’s been 45 minutes now, and you still hoped he’d be there. It was long past an hour that you admitted that he wasn’t coming. 

The following Monday you learned the whole thing was a prank, and he never wanted to ask you to the dance. It’s in the school paper that he’s at the dance, dancing cheek to cheek with one of the cheerleaders, who you can’t help but compare yourself to. 

***

Eddie is sitting at the middle school cafeteria table alone. He’s about a hundred pages into the Hobbit and the crusts of his peanut butter sandwich are forgotten about on the crinkly brown paper bag Uncle Wayne packed his lunch in. He’s long forgotten he’s sitting alone, far too engrossed in the story to care, when suddenly his head is yanked back by someone tugging on his t-shirt. 

“What’s up, Freak?” the voice asks before shoving Eddie back towards the table. He catches himself on the edge before his head comes in contact with the surface. He winces as anger boils up inside him. The three jocks laugh amongst themselves until a familiar voice shoos them away. 

“Sorry about them,” she says apologetically as Eddie looks to see her. Chrissy. He notices how she glances from him to the cafeteria table where the cheerleaders sit, and Eddie knows she doesn’t want to be seen with him for too long. 

“You can go, I’m fine,” Eddie says, forcing a laugh to make her feel better. “But, uh, I wanted to ask you-” 

“Okay, thanks,” she says, cutting him off and practically skipping to sit next to the prick who shoved him. Eddie recoils as the jock’s arm wraps around her. Eddie rolls his eyes and gets up to have lunch outside. Along with the remains of his lunch, he shoves the necklace he meant to give her in the bin. He’d stayed up past his bedtime, Wayne showing him how to drill a small hole into the top of one of his guitar picks to put a metal jewelry loop through so it could be put on a silver chain. 

***

You’re sitting at the table in the dimly lit restaurant and sipping on your cocktail when you see him walk in. He matches the description your friend gave you, and you feel yourself smile at how cute he is- definitely living up to the hype. Your friend spent weeks convincing you to go out on this date- one of her boyfriend’s best friends. They’re in the same fraternity. 

You can see as he walks into the dining room, he’s looking around trying to find his date. You offer a smile when he makes eye contact, and you offer a small wave. 

“James?” You ask, “you’re exactly like how Donna described you.” He offers a polite closed lipped smile, and a nod, taking a seat across from you without saying anything. 

As the date continues, you notice you’re doing a lot of the talking. You ask him questions and you’re met with a lot of one word answers. He looks detached, checking his watch and his attention seems to be wandering throughout the restaurant at anything but you. By the time your entrees arrive, he yawns. 

“I’m sorry, did I do something or say something?” you ask, hesitantly.

“No, no you’re good,” he says, straightening his posture like it would correct the behavior he’s been exhibiting. 

He pays for dinner, and you ask if he’d like to do this again sometime (just to be polite, you knew it was going nowhere). He sucks in air from between his teeth, and lets out an exhale. 

“You’re a nice person,” he says, putting his hands in his pockets as he waits for the valet to bring his car. “I’m sorry, but you aren’t really my type. Tom didn’t tell me anything about you really. I just felt like we didn’t click.” You notice the way his eyes scan your body, the unspoken awkwardness of you knowing what he isn’t saying. You nod, and say strained goodbyes as he gets in his car. You wished you were more surprised. 

***

Eddie is met with dirty looks when he approaches a girl at the bar. He feels her eyes on his tattoos and on his clothes, judging him. He sees her friend, who's also looking at him, lean in and whisper something and they both laugh. He knows the joke is on him, yet again. 

He opts to hang where he is, leaning against one of the high top tables, when he watches another guy approach her. He’s muscular, of course he is, and Eddie looks down at his own torso in comparison as this guy’s abs strain his shirt. Eddie scoffs, but now feels incredibly insecure at how his own shirt hangs loosely on his figure. 

***

DAY SIX

“Are you still worried about tomorrow?” Eddie asks, playing haphazardly with his rings as he sits with his forearms rested on his thighs. 

“A little,” you admit sheepishly. “Are you?” 

“More excited than nervous,” he replies honestly. “This whole thing has been fucking wild,” he chuckles, shaking his head. 

“Insane,” you agree, laying on the couch, staring up at the ceiling. 

“I just wanted to ask, no pressure,” Eddie says, clearing his throat, “Uh the other day, when we talked about, you know- what’s gonna happen when we see each other…”

“Yes?”

“You said to not hold back, I don’t remember exactly what it was but along the lines of ‘I don’t want you to hold back. Just whatever feels right to you in that moment, do it. Kiss me, touch me, I’m down for everything.’ Or something. I just want to make sure…”

“You don’t remember exactly, huh?” you tease. 

“Is that still what you want?” he asks earnestly. 

“Without a doubt,” you smile.

TAGLIST

@woahnotmecryingoverafanfiction @ali-r3n @cherrycolas-things @hellfirebabe666 @trixyvixx @stardancerluv @i--wont-run-this-time @mewchiili @muamazon4 @1975lily @sadbitchfangirl @strangerthings36 @fanficfanatic000 @andrearose89 @sosawwycantrelate @animechick555

#eddie munson x reader #eddie munson x y/n #eddie munson stranger things #eddie munson smut #eddie munson x f!reader #eddie munson x plus size!reader smut #eddie munson x plus size reader #eddie munson fanfiction #eddie munson x you #stranger things #stranger things fan fic #eddie munson #joe quinn characters #eddie munson x female reader #eddie munson fluff #eddie munson x insecure reader #eddie munson fanfic #eddie x reader #eddie x you #plus size reader #plus size reader insert #reader insert #reader insert smut #reader insert fanfic

[swan-orpheus]

To preface this, I am not saying this out of sympathy for the ISB folks in the slightest. I should not have to state it outright, but well, there we are. Just in case. 

I think that we are meant to see them in light of the prisoners as well. Probably an obvious statement but follow my drift... 

Dedra is on to something for sure, but is also under pressure to keep producing leads. It’s exciting, but rather dangerous whether she realizes it or not, especially for Major Partagaz. He looks afraid at those meetings. It is subtle but definitely there. He’s staked a lot on Lt. Meero and he was grasping for every scrap of new information including the mere possibility that Cassian Andor was present on Aldhani. Earlier on, he spent most meetings dressing down his subordinates in much the same way that Hyne tried to take Syril Karn down a peg or two. It was uneventful, but relatively safe. Lt. Blevin may be wiser than he looks. He knows to stick to his sectors and not rock the boat and that this will guarantee him relative comfort. Or you could argue that he is under the delusion that being quiet and sticking to your lane (to use one of the prison wardens’ phrasing) will will keep you safe forever. You have nothing to fear if you have done nothing wrong, so don’t get anyone’s attention. 

In Ep 4, Dedra Meero was not keen on sparking Lt. Blevin’s interest when she asked for the data on the Starpath unit, but now she is in danger of making the same mistake as Syril, of pushing and sticking her neck out too far because she is convinced that she is right about everything. She’s brilliant, but I do not think that the Empire ultimately cares. This line of inquiry is dredging up all sorts of things, none of it certain even if it does look promising. And the moment that it does not yield, cannot be covered up or controlled, she and anyone else involved are in trouble.

We already know that the prison has a massive flaw, the electrical grid upon which it is heavily reliant. The system itself also has a flaw in that The Empire will never be able to build enough secure prisons for all of the people that they wish to chuck in them. But leaving potentially anti-Imperial citizens free to move (and move against them) is also a huge risk. At the end of the day, they cannot contain and control the entire populace. The harder they try, the worse that it will be for them. I am wondering if by the end of the season we are going to see Partagaz and/or Meero fall. Partagaz could get the axe and Meero could get spared, but have a much less “fun” time at her job in future. 

There is definitely a mole within the ISB. One in particular is rather vocal and asks a lot of questions. They will warn Luthen and company about the ISB’s knowledge of the Spellhaus raid which will make things messy for the ISB when they fail to predict or assail the particulars in a manner that will allow them to catch the higher ups like Axis or Saw or whoever. These past few eps have been rather dark, but are clearly building up to a major catharsis in Eps 11-12. 

The ISB will be caught in their own web and individuals will be punished harshly and then replaced accordingly. They will fall into the shadows and be forgotten just like the prisoners who die before they get to leave. No matter how high up you reckon yourself, you are not exempt from being disposed of if you fail. 

“If you fall here, you fall alone.” 

The Empire is circles within circles within circles. Circular architecture, many-side polygons, labyrinths. Prisons. The only way out is to destroy the prison. 

One way or another, it will be very interesting to find out what happens next. 

As an aside, I hope that Dr. Gorst gets to sit in that chair that he’s so fond of, and that that is how he is found by the Empire. If he is found at all. 

#star wars #andor #andor spoilers #andor meta #the isb #thoughts and theories #this show is making me vicious #but he richly deserves it.

[arwenkenobi48]

The PDF That Saved My Life - Why I Love “All Tomorrows” With All My Heart

(Content Warning: Discussions of trauma, suicidal ideation and sexual abuse)

*clears throat* So, as some of you may be aware, the past few weeks haven’t been easy, not in the least. I was struggling with serious suicidal urges and feeling extreme anguish towards my own body and soul. I believed myself to be tainted, filthy and all manner of destructive and negative things.

The reason behind this breakdown was due to the realisation that I had experienced sexual harassment and assault multiple times throughout my life, including an occasion last year in which I was groped by an immediate relative. I had been aware of the incident since it happened, but was in denial. I was thinking “It couldn’t have been that bad, right?” But after trying unsuccessfully to repress it, I had to face the facts that she did what she did. I was heartbroken and I’m still deeply saddened by the realisation. Everything just seemed to fall apart and I psychologically imploded, plummeting into a dark pit of worthlessness and childlike sorrow. I felt as if I had been thrown into a mental oubliette; just tossed away and forgotten about on every level. Whenever I wasn’t bawling my eyes out and grieving my lost innocence, I was stress-eating and lying in bed, feeling nothing. Every now and then, I’d receive a short burst of energy, but nothing substantial, and the feelings remained.

Despite all of that, though, I didn’t want to die. A small part of my mind wanted to hold on and ride out these waves of suicidal thoughts. But I also knew I shouldn’t have to be going through this cycle of building up and breaking down, so I finally managed to seek professional help. There’s another thing that also pushed me towards seeking help and eventually guided me out of this dark place, and that’s the work of science fiction I mentioned in the title. All Tomorrows by C. M. Koseman (I hope I’ve spelled that right).

I don’t remember exactly how I came across it, but I think it was the video by Alt Shift X on YouTube that did it. As you can imagine, my dark thoughts weren’t only directed towards myself, but the world at large. I was wondering how life could be so cruel as to let something so horrific happen to me. I saw the thumbnail of that video and I didn’t know what it was. I had vaguely heard of All Tomorrows, but was more familiar with the much more nihilistic Dougal Dixon book Man After Man, and as such I got the two confused. I clicked on the All Tomorrows video, barely paying much attention and dismissively thinking: “oh great another sci-fi dystopia that predicted humanity’s inevitable downfall”.

What that video showed me absolutely blew my mind. As I discovered C. M. Koseman’s intricate worldbuilding science fiction project, I became fascinated and enthralled by the journeys and evolutions of the various post-human species, from the fun-loving Satyriacs and the mellowed out Snake People, to the bloodthirsty Killer Folk and the horrifying Bone Crushers. Yes, many of the stories were very, very sad. The Mantelopes lost everything and devolved because intelligence was so painful. The Striders, Titans and Temptors were all wiped out before they had the chance to truly reach their full potential. The Qu and Gravitals, one could say, ruined everything. But what truly amazed me was the fact that many, many of these stories also contained great happiness.

The Colonials, for example, suffered through the kind of torture that I wouldn’t wish on the Devil himself. Being wedged together into a wall of flesh bricks, all while retaining intelligence. And yet, they managed to turn into the beautiful Modular People and create a utopian society. Yes, the Killer Folk are traditionally violent, but the ones that made the biggest progress were the ones that chose peace over war. The Satyriacs started off as the mindless Hedonists, but were able to use their intelligence to appreciate every moment of their joyful lives. The lowly Worms became the comfort-loving Snake People, always able to appreciate the little things in life. The flattened Lopsiders rose up from the ground and became the proud, tall Asymmetric People. The list goes on, but you get my point.

The point is, even though this future humanity went through the sort of Hell that makes the past few years look tame by comparison, they always managed to rise up. Sure, nothing was ever quite the same again, but they managed to make something new and wonderful out of that. When you cut an orange, you may not have a whole fruit anymore, but you have lots of slices that can be shared with everyone. The best thing you can do is move forward. The future will always hold something better for you, even if that seems impossible. Don’t be afraid to reach for it. The final quote of this incredible piece of sci-fi wiped away the remnants of dark still clinging to me: “Love today and seize all tomorrows.” To me, that meant “Be a kind soul and you can achieve anything.”

This entire story ignited a strong feeling of empathy within me; an emotion I thought I was too traumatised to ever properly feel or express again. I think that was the point. Sure, the many strange post-humans may not look like us, but we cannot deny that they are human and that brings out the best in us. We shouldn’t be afraid to show empathy for our fellow humans. Thinking lowly of what collectively proves to be our best quality, claiming we’re “above” it and aiming to become “bigger than” everything else deprives us of our humanity. Empathy, compassion, love, that’s what makes us truly powerful. If we can learn to love today, the utopian future we all dream of will finally be ours.

Love is something that, from an early age and for over half my life, I was never truly given. But that doesn’t mean I can’t give it to others. Just as the post-humans were able to move forward and rise from the ashes, I fully intend to do the same. I’m safe now. The people who hurt me are gone from my life and will never hurt me again. I’m surrounded by loving friends, in a city I love, attending a university I love, receiving the therapy I need to heal and soon to be medically transitioning too. Even though I still struggle to accept it, I’m learning to love myself as well. I think that’s the greatest love someone can ever feel. If I continue to love each today that comes, all the tomorrows will be brighter and brighter.

And to think this all started because of a PDF about the hypothetical future of humanity. I’m determined to hold on no matter what. Idk if C. M. Koseman uses tumblr or any other social media for that matter, but if he comes across this somehow, I just want to say “Thank you from the bottom of my heart. I wouldn’t be here today without All Tomorrows.”

https://youtu.be/-WIk29qtrIo

(PS: I know I have stumbled and made mistakes on my platform as well. I’m still a little bit unsteady after being in such a dark mental state for so long. I’m sorry about that. I am doing better. Thank you all if you made it this far. I love and appreciate every single one of you.)

#arwen speaks #tw: abuse #tw: suicidal ideation #tw: trauma #all tomorrows #personal philosophy #Youtube #science fiction #the future #empathy #the power of love #queue

[baoshan-sanren]

Chapter 39

of the wwx emperor au I’m thinking of calling Fuck the Canon: Happy Endings For Everyone

Prologue | Chapter 1 | Chapter 2 | Chapter 3 | Chapter 4 | Chapter 5 | Chapter 6 | Chapter 7 | Chapter 8 Part 1 | Chapter 8 Part 2 | Chapter 9 | Chapter 10 | Chapter 11 | Chapter 12 | Chapter 13 | Chapter 14 | Chapter 15 Part 1 | Chapter 15 Part 2 | Chapter 16 | Chapter 17 | Chapter 18 | Chapter 19 | Chapter 20 | Chapter 21 | Chapter 22 Part 1 | Chapter 22 Part 2 | Chapter 23 | Chapter 24 | Chapter 25 | Chapter 26 | Chapter 27 | Chapter 28 | Chapter 29 | Chapter 30 | Chapter 31 | Chapter 32 | Chapter 33 | Chapter 34 | Chapter 35 | Chapter 36 | Chapter 37 | Chapter 38

The meeting concludes in a way that is more than satisfactory to the Emperor, if not so satisfactory to the rest of the Council.

Jiang FengMian is to retain his title of High Councilor, but only to soften the blow of the abrupt transition of power. A period of five years has been determined as sufficient for this task. Uncle Jiang will use those years to guide his replacement in the court intricacies and details of his responsibilities, which will ensure full transparency in this particular shift of power.  

The choice of the next High Councilor had been the bloodiest battle of the day, one that had drawn the meeting to a standstill for hours. Wei Ying would not budge from his choice however, and once fully aware of his intentions, uncle Jiang had given his firm and unquestionable support. With uncle XingChen’s help, they had wrangled the Council into submission, skillfully enough where Wei Ying had felt guilty, all over again, for nearly causing uncle Jiang to qi deviate that very morning.

Shijie will make an excellent High Councilor. Behind her gentle voice and agreeable manner, there is strength of conviction that the Sect Leaders will find as unyielding as a rocky mountain side. Wei Ying cannot wait to see her turn all that sweet charm and strength of will against Sect Leader Yao, or any of the other men long accustomed to Jiang FengMian’s flexibility. Wei Ying may actually start attending Sect Leader meetings regularly, just for entertainment’s sake.

With the High Councilor being forced into retirement within five years, and the Council itself on the verge of dissolving, the question of the Emperor’s marriage to a Second Young Master of a disgraced Sect is no longer as grave as it would have appeared under less serious circumstances. It was immediately apparent which Sect Leaders had spent their morning in close talks with the Royal Companion. These men, fidgeting and nervous, had voiced their support for the marriage before Wei Ying could even fully voice his intentions.

He had never felt the need to ask A-Sang what particular leverage he has over certain sect leaders, or how he had come to obtain it. A-Sang has always been eerily skilled at ferreting out their secrets and honing in on their weaknesses. The information A-Sang has on them must be significant, because they would not be influenced to withdraw their support, regardless of the pressure from the other Council members.

Wei Ying is allowed to marry anyone he chooses, Lan Zhan included.

It is a good day, and he feels immeasurably happy leaving the council hall, watching the Sect Leaders drift away in a daze, as if physically beaten into submission. He had promised Lan Zhan that he would give him time to speak with his uncle, to speak with his brother, to consult with the Lan Sect Elders. He had promised as much time as Lan Zhan wants or needs. Still, it is a struggle not to immediately seek him out and make the proposal again, properly this time, with all the pomp and ceremony.

He will not. He will be patient. But.

Someone should inform Lan Zhan that the Council has reached a favorable decision. This is not information that Lan Zhan should obtain second-hand, through gossip and idle chatter. Wei Ying will not pressure him, but informing him that the Council had given its unanimous approval would be the proper, respectful thing to do. It is nowhere near the thing Wei Ying actually wants to do, which is to fall to his knees and latch on to Lan Zhan’s ankles and beg him to agree to the marriage now.

Perhaps if he only strolled by the Imperial guest chambers. Casually. And happened to catch the sight of Lan Zhan, perhaps he could--

“Wei WuXian!”

The shout echoes against the high ceiling, rebounding down the hallway with force.

There is only one person who would dare shout his name in the Jade Sword Palace, and that person is currently waiting for him at the South Lakes Pavilion. Also, A-Cheng rarely disrespects him in public, unless Wei Ying has done something truly obnoxious.

He turns to find Jin ZiXuan striding down the hallway, his sword drawn, his face red and furious.

Uh-oh Wei Ying thinks.

He had forgotten all about him.

“Wei WuXian!! How dare you!?”

His voice is nearly obliterated by the sound of blades being drawn all around them, both Imperial Guards and the Jiang Sect forming a wall in front of Wei Ying. Jin GuangShan, who is not the member of the Council, and yet, is always somehow found hovering in the vicinity of every Council meeting, throws himself in front of Jin ZiXuan.

Wei Ying has never before seen Jin GuangShan look visibly terrified; it is not nearly as amusing as he had expected it to be.  

“What are you standing there for?” he snaps at the four disciples following behind Jin ZiXuan, all four clearly distraught, “Grab him.”

Jin ZiXuan wheels on the four disciples, sword at the ready, as if daring them to try.

“Please forgive my son, Your Majesty,” Jin GuangShan exclaims, “He has been ill lately, and speaking nonsense. We have had him confined for his own safety. I will take him back immediately. ZiXuan, your mother must be worried to death! Let us go back.”

Jin ZiXuan is practically vibrating. Wei Ying has never seen the Young Master of the Jin Sect this overwrought; he would not have thought it possible.

The dignified, puffed-up peacock is acting like an absolute madman. It is fascinating to watch. Wei Ying wishes A-Sang was here to see it for himself.

“I demand an account of the Emperor!” the youth shouts, “I demand to know why my betrothal was dissolved! I have the right to know!”

“You have a right to nothing!” Jin GuangShan shouts in his face, his beard quivering in agitation, “It is not on you to question the Emperor! Your Majesty,” he turns to Wei Ying, his smile sickly, “As you can see, he is not well. Please do not listen to anything he says. This illness is a personal matter, one that will be resolved quickly.”

“I am not ill!” Jin ZiXuan shakes off his father’s insistent grip to point his sword at Wei Ying, as if unaware of the three dozen swords that point at him in turn, “I demand an answer!”

Wei Ying does not have an answer, at least not an answer that would satisfy Jin ZiXuan. The dissolution of the engagement was nothing more than a power move in a game he had intended to win at any cost.

Shijie knows that Wei Ying will eventually allow the marriage to take place. He would never deny her happiness for his own gain, even if he cannot possibly comprehend what happiness can be gained from marrying into the Jin Sect.

But Jin ZiXuan does not know that the dissolution of his betrothal is not a permanent measure. And apparently, he feels quite strongly about this, a revelation that is somehow both satisfactory and annoying.

“Your Majesty,” Jiang FengMian says, “I do believe that Jin ZiXuan must be seriously ill. Otherwise, he would never act like this. Please allow Sect Leader Jin to take his son back. We will summon the Head Healer immediately.”

Jin ZiXuan looks as if he may stab the next person who suggests that he is ill.

“Nonsense,” Sect Leader Yao exclaims, just when his opinion is least wanted or needed, “No illness excuses such disrespect. Any man who speaks to the Emperor in this way should be accused of inciting rebellion, and his life be made forfeit.”

Jin GuangShan looks horrified. Jiang FengMain grimaces into his beard.

Wei Ying does not want to laugh, but it is incredibly difficult to keep a straight face. Sect Leader Yao, who would slander his own mother if it gained him favor, accusing someone else of disrespect. A-Sang will be furious he has missed this performance.

“Put him in the dungeons for now,” Wei Ying says, “Let us see if his head cools. Do not hurt him!” he adds quickly, as the Imperial guard advances to seize Jin ZiXuan’s sword.  

Predictably, Jin ZiXuan fights them, and predictably, he loses, although Wei Ying has to admit that the boy’s skills are fairly decent.

“Your Majesty,” uncle Jiang begins, his voice concerned, “the Young Master’s illness--“

“He is not ill,” Wei Ying snorts quietly, so his voice would not carry to Sect Leader Yao, “He is young, stupid, and angry. I identify, but cannot condone such behavior in public.”

“Your Majesty,” Jin GuangShan is kneeling, his face as gray as the stone arch behind him, “I beg leniency for my son. He is truly not well--“

“Sect Leader,” Wei Ying interrupts coldly, “Do not invite me to speak words we may both regret in the future. Your son had drawn his sword with the intent to cause harm to the Emperor. What possible leniency can you seek that I have not already shown?”

Jin GuangShan says nothing else, and his silence is somehow more unsettling than all the falsehoods that so frequently spill out of his mouth. He remains kneeling even as Wei Ying gathers his escort, and continues down the hallway as if nothing of significance had occurred.

“This will cause problems, Your Majesty,” uncle Jiang says softly.

“Then do your job, and ensure that it does not.”

#the untamed #cql #mdzs #ficlet #m #wwx emperor au #jin zixuan makes an ass of himself #wei ying is not amused #well #maybe he's a little amused #we're getting to the #it's my story and i'll do what i want #part of this au #😂😂😂 #the next chapter will be sad and miserable #fingers crossed another 5-6 chapters to go #and probably an epilogue in multiple arts #ily chickens

[bluewatsons]

Niall Shanks et al., Are animal models predictive for humans?, 4 Philos Ethics Humanit Med (2009)

Abstract

It is one of the central aims of the philosophy of science to elucidate the meanings of scientific terms and also to think critically about their application. The focus of this essay is the scientific term predict and whether there is credible evidence that animal models, especially in toxicology and pathophysiology, can be used to predict human outcomes. Whether animals can be used to predict human response to drugs and other chemicals is apparently a contentious issue. However, when one empirically analyzes animal models using scientific tools they fall far short of being able to predict human responses. This is not surprising considering what we have learned from fields such evolutionary and developmental biology, gene regulation and expression, epigenetics, complexity theory, and comparative genomics.

Review

"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." Lewis Carroll in Through the Looking Glass 1871.

There is a serious scientific controversy concerning the predictive power of animal models. In this article we will use the phrase animal model to mean, or the word animal in the context of, the use of a nonhuman animal, usually a mammal or vertebrate to predict human response to drugs and disease. We enthusiastically acknowledge that animals can be successfully used in many areas of science, such as in basic research, as a source for replacement parts for humans, as bioreactors and so forth. These uses are not included in our definition or critique as there is no claim made for their predictive power. This article focuses solely on using animals/animal models to predict human responses in light of what the word predict means in science.

Philosophy of science

The meaning of words is very important in all areas of study but especially science.

Philosophers of science including Quine, Hempel and others have argued that words must have meaning in science and in fact these meanings separate science from pseudoscience. Take for example the word prediction. A research method need not be predictive to be used but if one claims predictive ability for the test or project, then one means something very specific.

This paper addresses the use of the word predict as applied to animal models. It is our position that the meaning of the word has been corrupted and hence the concept behind the word is in danger as well as everything the concept implies. Predict is not so much a word as a concept and is closely related to hypothesis. Hypothesis can be defined as a proposed explanation for a phenomenon, either observed or thought, that needs to be tested for validity. According to Sarewitz and Pielke:

In modern society, prediction serves two important goals. First, prediction is a test of scientific understanding, and as such has come to occupy a position of authority and legitimacy. Scientific hypotheses are tested by comparing what is expected to occur with what actually occurs. When expectations coincide with events, it lends support to the power of scientific understanding to explain how things work. " [Being] predictive of unknown facts is essential to the process of empirical testing of hypotheses, the most distinctive feature of the scientific enterprise," observes biologist Francisco Ayala (Ayala, F. 1996. The candle and the darkness Science 273:442.)[1] (Emphasis added.)

In the case of animal models what actually occurs is what happens in humans. If the purpose of the test, be it a test on an animal or in silico, is to predict human response then the tests must be evaluated by how well it conforms to human response. We again acknowledge that not all tests and studies involving animals are done with prediction in mind. Nevertheless, those tests promoted as being predictive must be judged by how well they predict human response.

Sarewitz and Pielke continue:

Second, prediction is also a potential guide for decision making. We may seek to know the future in the belief that such knowledge will stimulate and enable beneficial action in the present [1].

We will return to decision making.

The philosopher W.V.O. Quine has remarked:

A prediction may turn out true or false, but either way it is diction: it has to be spoken or, to stretch a point, written. Etymology and the dictionary agree on this point. The nearest synonyms "foresight," "foreknowledge," and "precognition" are free of that limitation, but subject to others. Foreknowledge has to be true, indeed infallible. Foresight is limited to the visual when taken etymologically, and is vague otherwise. "Precognition" connotes clairvoyance ... Prediction is rooted in a general tendency among higher vertebrates to expect that similar experiences will have sequels similar to each other [[2]159] ... (Emphasis added.)

Predictions, generated from hypotheses, are not always correct. But if a modality or test or method is said to be predictive then it should get the right answer a very high percentage of the time in the biological sciences and all the time in the physical sciences. (We will discuss this as it applies to the biological sciences momentarily.)

If a modality consistently fails to make accurate predictions then the modality cannot be said to be predictive simply because it occasionally forecasts a correct answer. The above separates the scientific use of the word predict from the layperson's use of the word, which more closely resembles the words forecast, guess, conjecture, project and so forth. We will return to these points shortly

Many philosophers of science think a theory (and we add, a modality) could be confirmed or denied by testing the predictions it made. Unlike the physical sciences, the biological sciences, which study complex systems, must rely on statistics and probability when assessing what the response to a stimulus will be or in discussing the likelihood a phenomenon will occur. There is an assumption that has taken on the trappings of a theory or perhaps an overarching hypothesis in the animal model community that results from experiments on animals can be directly applied to humans; that animal models are predictive. This has resulted in an unquestioned methodological approach; using animals as surrogate humans. Ironically, this hypothesis has not been questioned as hypotheses should be questioned in science, hence our calling it an overarching hypothesis. Whether or not the animal model per se can be used to predict human response can be tested and if the results have a high enough sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value then the hypothesis that animals can predict human response would be verified. If verified, then one could say that animal models are predictive for humans and if refuted then one could say animal models are not predictive for humans.

There are two very different ways animals and hypotheses are used in science. Hypotheses result in predictions that have to be tested thereby confirming or falsifying the hypothesis. Let us assume that a scientist is using animals to perform basic research. At the end of the series of animal experiments the investigator has, at most, a hypothesis about a likely human response to the same stimulus or substance, when allowances have been made for differences in body weight, exposure, and so on. The prediction that the hypothesis entails must then be tested, and this will require the gathering of human data. The prediction may be verified or it may be falsified in the light of such human data, but the evidential burden here cannot be evaded from the standpoint of basic scientific methodology. Nowhere in this use of animals to generate a hypothesis have animals been assumed predictive. LaFollette and Shanks have referred to the practice of using animals in this fashion as heuristic or hypothetical animal models (HAMs) [3,4].

This is in contrast to the hypothesis that some scientists start with, namely that animals are predictive for humans. (See table ​table1.)1.) By assuming this, these scientists make the claim that drugs and chemicals that would have harmed humans have been kept off the market secondary to results from animal tests. This is disingenuous unless we have a priori reason to assume animal models are predictive. The hypothesis was, in these cases, never tested. It would in many cases be unethical to conduct on humans the sorts of carefully controlled laboratory studies that are regularly conducted on, say, rodents. However, there are other, ethical ways to gain human data in the context of epidemiology (for example retrospective and prospective epidemiological studies), in vitro research using human tissue, in silico research, and the recent technological breakthrough of microdosing [5]. Further, it must never be forgotten that when industrial chemicals find their way into the environment, or drugs are marketed to the general population, human experiments have already taken place. Moreover, as Altman [6] has observed, there are many examples, both ancient and modern, where researchers, doubting the applicability or relevance of animal models to the human situation, have experimented on themselves – a practice that Altman points out continues to the present (recent Nobel laureate Barry Marshal being but one example). In any event, at the very least a track record of success (vis-à-vis positive and negative predictive values) using specific animal models should be evident if society is to accept hypotheses from animal testing as predictive for humans.

Table 1. Hypothesis

Therefore, we must emphasize that when discussing animals as predictive models we are discussing the overarching hypothesis that animals are predictive, not the use of animals to generate a hypothesis such as occurs in basic research.

Now is an appropriate time to discuss the concept of proof and where the burden of proof lies in science. As in law, it lies on the claimant. The null hypothesis demands that we assume there is no connection between events until such causation is proven. Thus, those claiming animal models are predictive of human responses in the context of biomedical research must show that what they are claiming is true. The burden is not on us to prove that animal models of, say carcinogenesis or toxicity, are not predictive. It is the job of those advocating animal models as predictive to demonstrate they are. This will require a consideration of what the evidence actually shows.

While physics deals with simple systems upon which reductionism can be practiced, biology does not always have that luxury. There are areas in biology – for example comparative anatomy – where the use of scaling principles have had genuine applicability. But biology is not physics, and there are other places – for example in some branches of predictive toxicology – where the use of such scaling factors (such as body weight2/3) have been less than useful for reasons we will explore below. Biological systems are certainly consistent with the laws of physics, but they have properties consequent upon internal organization, ultimately rooted in evolutionary history, not found in physics. This means that even when the same stimulus is applied, end results can differ markedly. The response of different humans to the same drug or disease is a well-known example of this phenomenon [7-13]. There are however, ways to judge the predictive nature of tests even in biological complex systems. Values such as positive predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (we will discuss these values momentarily) can be calculated to confirm or refute hypotheses. Values from tests seeking to predict a response that approach what would be expected from random chance would obviously not fall into the category predictive.

Claims about the predictive nature of animal models

According to Salmon there are at least three reasons for making predictions:

because we want to know what will happen in the future;

to test a theory;

an action is required and the best way to choose which action is to predict the future [14].

In the case of carcinogenesis we want to know: (1) what will happen in the future (will the chemical cause cancer in humans?); and (3) an action is required (allow the chemical on the market or not?) and the best way to choose which action is to be able to predict the future. Neither (1) nor (3) is subtle. We want a correct answer to the question, "Is this chemical carcinogenic to humans?" or to similar questions such as, "What will this drug do to humans?" and "Is this drug a teratogen?" and "Is this the receptor used by HIV to enter the human cell?" But guessing correctly or finding correlations are not, as we have seen the same as predicting the answer. Neither is a high degree of sensitivity alone, as we shall see, the same as prediction.

The following will help the reader gain a feel for the contours of this scientific debate.

Butcher [15], Horrobin [16], Pound et al. [17] and others [3,4,18-24] have questioned the value of using animals to predict human response. Regardless, prediction is a problem. U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt stated in 2007:

Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies" [24].

This is a very damaging statement for those who assert that animals are predictive. For some, the facts behind this statement would, without further support, answer the prediction question. But we will continue.

This debate has recently expanded to Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine. Knight [25] recently questioned the use of chimpanzees in biomedical research citing among other reasons their lack of predictability. Shanks and Pyles [26] questioned the ability of animals to predict human response resulting in Vineis and Melnick [27] responding that animals can be used to predict human response to chemicals with reference to carcinogenesis and that epidemics of cancer could have been prevented if animal data had been used to reduce human exposure or ban the chemical entirely. This claim, of animals predicting human response, is not unique [28,29].

Gad wrote in Animal Models in Toxicology 2007:

Biomedical sciences' use of animals as models to help understand and predict responses in humans, in toxicology and pharmacology in particular, remains both the major tool for biomedical advances and a source of significant controversy ...

At the same time, although there are elements of poor practice that are real, by and large animals have worked exceptionally well as predictive models for humans-when properly used ...

Whether serving as a source of isolated organelles, cells or tissues, a disease model, or as a prediction for drug or other xenobiotic action or transformation in man, experiments in animals have provided the necessary building blocks that have permitted the explosive growth of medical and biological knowledge in the later half of the 20th century and into the 21st century ...

Animals have been used as models for centuries to predict what chemicals and environmental factors would do to humans ... The use of animals as predictors of potential ill effects has grown since that time [the year 1792].

Current testing procedures (or even those at the time in the United States, where the drug [thalidomide] was never approved for human use) would have identified the hazard and prevented this tragedy [29]. (Emphasis added.)

Fomchenko and Holland observe:

GEMs [genetically engineered mice] closely recapitulate the human disease and are used to predict human response to a therapy, treatment or radiation schedule [30]. (Emphasis added.)

Hau, editor of an influential handbook on animal-based research notes:

A third important group of animal models is employed as predictive models. These models are used with the aim of discovering and quantifying the impact of a treatment, whether this is to cure a disease or to assess toxicity of a chemical compound [31].

Clearly, Hau offers the use of animals as predictive models just as we are describing.

The prediction claim is also strong when the word prediction is not actually used but is implied or linked to causality. Fomchenko and Holland continue:

Using in vitro systems and in vivo xenograft brain tumor modeling provides a quick and efficient way of testing novel therapeutic agents and targets, knowledge from which can be translated and tested in more sophisticated GEMs that faithfully recapitulate human brain tumors and will likely result in high-quality clinical trials with satisfactory treatment outcomes and reduced drug toxicities. Additional use of GEMs to establish causal links between the presence of various genetic alterations and brain tumor initiation or determining their necessity for tumor maintenance and/or progression provide us with a glimpse into other important aspects of brain tumor biology [30]. (Emphasis added.)

Fomchenko and Holland are here clearly saying what happens in animals will happen in humans; that animals are predictive. Akkina is saying the same:

A major advantage with this in vivo system [genetically modified SCID mice] is that any data you get from SCID-hu mice is directly applicable to a human situation [32].

This use of prediction is not confined to the scientific literature. It is, if anything even more widespread when scientists are speaking to the nonscientist public.

The above examples could be multiplied without effort. Due to the ubiquitous nature of comments like the above, we can safely deduce that many in the scientific community use the word predict to mean that what happens in animal models will translate directly to humans. But is this a factual interpretation of reality?

Prediction in biological complex systems

What does constitute prediction in biological complex systems? Many justify the use of animals as predictive models by stating that animals are predictive but may not be reliably predictive. This seems to be oxymoronic. Reliably predictive would be a tautology and a method cannot be predictive, in science, if it is not reliably so. However, we acknowledge that biology is not physics so perhaps some leniency is needed when discussing prediction in biological complex systems. How then should we think of prediction in the context of toxicology, pathophysiology, and pharmacology? The 2 × 2 table for calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value is how predictability is assessed in these contexts (see ​table22).

Table 2. Statistics used in analysis of prediction.

In biology many concepts are best evaluated by using simple statistical methods involving probability. For example, in medicine we can use a blood test to determine whether someone has liver disease. In order to ascertain how well this test actually determines the health of the liver we calculate the sensitivity and specificity of the test along with the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). The sensitivity of a test is the probability (measured on a scale from 0.0 to 1.0) of a positive test among people whose test should be positive – those who do in fact suffer from liver disease. Specificity is the probability of a negative test among people whose test should be negative – those without liver disease. The positive predictive value of a test is the proportion of people with positive test results who are actually positive. The negative predictive value is the proportion of people with negative test results who are actually negative. This is all quite straightforward. Very few tests have a sensitivity or specificity of 1.0 or a PPV and NPV of 1.0 but in order for a test to be useful given the demanding standards of medical practice, in this case tell us if the patient actually has liver disease, it needs to be have PPV and NPV in at least the .95 to 1.0 range.

By definition, when we speak of animals predicting human response in drug testing and disease research we are addressing the risks of wrong predictions and how much risk society is willing to tolerate. Troglitazone (Rezulin™) is a good example of the margin of error for medical practice tolerated in society today. Troglitazone was taken by well over 1 million people with less 1% suffering liver failure, yet the drug was withdrawn because of this side effect [33]. (Interestingly, animal studies failed to reproduce liver failure from troglitazone [34].) Rofecoxib (Vioxx™) is another example of the small percentage of morbidity or mortality tolerated in the practice of medicine vis-à-vis introducing a new drug. Figures vary, and are controversial, but it now appears that apparently less than 1% of people who took rofecoxib experienced a heart attack or stroke as a result, yet it was also withdrawn [35]. This means that even if a test with a PPV of .99 had assured industry that rofecoxib and troglitazone were safe, the test would not have been accurate enough for society's standards. This is an important point. Medical practice does not tolerate risks (probability of being wrong) acceptable in some experiments conducted in labs. In basic research we might proceed with a study based on the outcome being more likely than not. For basic research this is acceptable. However, getting the answer wrong in medical practice has consequences; people die. Societal standards for medical practice today demand very high sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV from its tests. We will apply the above to animal models shortly.

These standards of prediction, described above, should not be confused with those of other activities in society such as gambling in Las Vegas. If we worked out a method to be correct 51% of the time, we would gladly take that predictive ability to the blackjack table, the roulette wheel, and the craps table and leave with a fortune. Sometimes being correct 51% of the time is great!

In light of the above, it is common to use multiple tests when attempting to determine a patient's condition or evaluate a drug. If someone suggests that an animal, say a mouse, can predict human response to chemicals vis-à-vis carcinogenesis, he would need to provide data consistent with that needed for ​table 2. Perhaps not one animal alone is capable of predicting human response but when the same result occurs in two species, say and mouse and a monkey, then perhaps the results are predictive. Or perhaps animal data combined with other data translates into a high predictive value. Again, if this were the case the person making the claim should be able to provide data amenable to evaluation by the gold standard laid out in table ​table2.2. To the best of our knowledge no such data exists.

Predicting human response

We will now discuss the actual data that does exist. The data from testing six drugs on animals was compared with the data from humans [36]. The animal tests were shown to have a sensitivity of 0.52 and the positive predictive value was 0.31. The sensitivity is about what one would expect from a coin toss and the PPV less. Not what is considered predictive in the scientific sense of the word. Values of this nature are more appropriately referred to as guesses. Because of data like this, animal modelers will occasionally use the phrase concordance rate or true positive concordance rate when judging animal tests. These terms are not in the normal prediction-relevant lexicon and are usually used to mean correlation, which has nothing to do with prediction, as we will see.

Two studies from the 1990s revealed that: (1) in only 4 of 24 toxicities were found in animal data first [36]; and (2) in only 6 of 114 cases did clinical toxicities have animal correlates [37]. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of animal models based on these studies are obviously suboptimal.

A 1994 study of 64 marketed drugs conducted by the Japanese Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association found that 39/91 (43%) clinical toxicities were not forecast from animal studies [38]. (This study, as do many others, counted as a positive prediction when any animal correlated with the human response. This is disingenuous as it is cherry picking the data.) Without knowing the raw data it is impossible to calculate a true PPV and NPV but even taken at face value, 43% wrong/57% correct is not predictive.

​Figures 1 and ​and 2 illustrate graphically our contention that animals are not predictive. Both figures chart bioavailability data from three species of animals and compare it to data from humans. (Bioavailability is usually defined as the fraction of a drug that reaches the systemic circulation and reflects a number of different variables. Regardless of the correlation or lack thereof of the variables, the bioavailability of the drug is the final determinant of how much drug presents to the receptor or active site.) Figure ​Figure11 was compiled by Harris from a paper by Grass and Sinko in Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. As the reader can see the bioavailability of various drugs is measured in humans and three species of animals (representing primates, rodents and dogs) and the results plotted. Some of the drugs that showed high levels of bioavailability in dogs had very low levels in humans and vice-versa. This was true regardless of drug or species. Some levels did correlate between species but as a whole there was no correlation between what a drug did in humans and what it did in any given animal species or any combination thereof.

Figure 1. Human vs animal bioavailability 1. Graph generously provided by James Harris PhD, who presented it at the Center for Business Intelligence conference titled 6th Forum on Predictive ADME/Tox held in Washington, DC September 27–29, 2006 and is adapted from data that appeared in Grass GM, Sinko PJ. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic simulation modelling. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2002 Mar 31;54(3):433–5.

Figure 2. Human vs animal bioavailability 2. Graph generously provided by James Harris PhD, who presented it at the Center for Business Intelligence conference titled 6th Forum on Predictive ADME/Tox held in Washington, DC September 27–29, 2006 and is adapted from data that appeared in Arun K Mandagere and Barry Jones. Prediction of Bioavailability. In (Eds) Han van de Waterbeemd, Hans Lennernäs, Per Artursson, and Raimund Mannhold. Drug Bioavailability: Estimation of Solubility, Permeability, Absorption and Bioavailability (Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry) Wiley-VCS 2003. P444–60.

​Figure 2 was complied by Harris from a book section by Mandagere and Jones in the book Drug Bioavailability: Estimation of Solubility, Permeability, Absorption and Bioavailability (Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry) and made the same measurements and reached the same conclusions as did Grass and Sinko.

As you can see there is little correlation between animal and human data. In some cases human bioavailability is high when bioavailability in dogs is high but in other cases dogs and humans vary considerably. The patterns exhibited by both are what are frequently referred to as a shotgun pattern; meaning that if one fired a shotgun full of bird shot at a target one would see the same pattern. No precision and no accuracy. The pattern is also referred to as a scattergram, meaning that the pattern is what one would expect from random associations.

The above illustrates why eliminating drugs in development based on animal tests presents problems. Sankar in The Scientist 2005:

The typical compound entering a Phase I clinical trial has been through roughly a decade of rigorous pre-clinical testing, but still only has an 8% chance of reaching the market. Some of this high attrition rate is due to toxicity that shows up only in late-stage clinical trials, or worse, after a drug is approved. Part of the problem is that the toxicity is assessed in the later stages of drug development, after large numbers of compounds have been screened for activity and solubility, and the best produced in sufficient quantities for animal studies.

Howard Jacob notes that rats and humans are 90% identical at the genetic level. However, the majority of the drugs shown to be safe in animals end up failing in clinical trials. "There is only 10% predictive power, since 90% of drugs fail in the human trials" in the traditional toxicology tests involving rats. Conversely, some lead compounds may be eliminated due to their toxicity in rats or dogs, but might actually have an acceptable risk profile in humans [39]. (Emphasis added.)

Again, for some this alone would settle the prediction question. But we continue.

Sensitivity is not the same prediction. While it is true that that all known human carcinogens that have been adequately studied have been shown to be carcinogenic in at least one animal species [40-42], it is also true that an irreverent aphorism in biology known as Morton's Law states: "If rats are experimented upon, they will develop cancer." Morton's law is similar to Karnofsky's law in teratology, which states that any compound can be teratogenic if given to the right species at the right dosage at the right time in the pregnancy. The point being that it is very easy to find positive results for carcinogenicity and teratogenicity; a high sensitivity. Nonetheless, this is meaningless without also knowing specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value.

Carcinogenesis

How well do animal models predict carcinogenesis? Possible carcinogens are listed in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) chemicals database managed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to Knight et al. [43] as of 1 January 2004, IRIS was unable to classify the carcinogenic status of 93 out of 160 chemicals that had been evaluated only by animal tests. The World Health Organisation also classifies chemicals according to carcinogenicity via the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

Knight et al. wrote in 2006:

For the 128 chemicals with human or animal data also assessed by the human carcinogenicity classifications were compatible with EPA classifications only for those 17 having at least limited human data (p = 0.5896). For those 111 primarily reliant on animal data, the EPA was much more likely than the IARC to assign carcinogenicity classifications indicative of greater human risk (p < 0.0001) [43].

This discrepancy is troublesome. Knight et al. discussed a study in 1993 by Tomatis and Wilbourn [44]. Tomatis and Wilbourn surveyed the 780 chemical agents or exposure circumstances listed within Volumes 1–55 of the IARC monograph series [45]. They found that "502 (64.4%) were classified as having definite or limited evidence of animal carcinogenicity, and 104 (13.3%) as definite or probable human carcinogens ... around 398 animal carcinogens were considered not to be definite or probable human carcinogens."

Knight et al. continue:

... based on these IARC figures, the positive predictivity of the animal bioassay for definite probable human carcinogens was only around 7% (104/502), while the false positive rate was a disturbing 79.3% (398/502) [43].

More-recent IARC classifications indicate little movement in the positive predictivity of the animal bioassay for human carcinogens. By January 2004, a decade later, only 105 additional agents had been added to the 1993 figure, yielding a total of 885 agents or exposure circumstances listed in the IARC Monographs [46]. Not surprisingly the proportion of definite or probable human carcinogens resembled the 1993 figure of 13.3%. By 2004, only 9.9% of these 885 were classified as definite human carcinogens, and only 7.2% as probable human carcinogens, yielding total of 17.1%.

Haseman [47] published a study in 2000 in which he revealed that 250 (53.1%) of chemicals in the NTP carcinogenicity database were carcinogenic in at least one sex-species group. He concluded that the actual number posing a significant carcinogenic risk to humans was probably far lower. Approximately half of all chemicals tested on animals and included in the comprehensive Berkeley-based potency carcinogenic database (CPDB) were carcinogenic [48].

Knight et al. conclude:

If a risk-avoidance interpretation is used, in which any positive result in male or female mice or rats is considered positive, then nine of the 10 known human carcinogens among the hundreds of chemicals tested by the NTP are positive, but so are an implausible 22% of all chemicals tested. If a less risk-sensitive interpretation is used, whereby only chemicals positive in both mice and rats are considered positive, then only three of the six known human carcinogens tested in both species are positive. The former interpretation could result in the needless denial of potentially useful chemicals to society, while the latter could result in widespread human exposure to undetected human carcinogens [43].

At this point in the debate, some will state that animal models can be useful in science and scientific research and attempt to conflate the word predict with the word useful. This is disingenuous for many reasons. First, useful is too ambiguous to mean anything. Useful to whom? Useful how? Almost anything can be useful in some sense of the word. If someone gets paid to engage in fortune telling then fortune telling is very useful to that person. Whether it can be used to predict the future is an entirely different question. We do not deny animal models can be quite useful in certain circumstances but this has nothing to do with whether they are predictive. Second, this is an example of bait and switch; sell animal models as predictive for humans then justify their use, since they are not predictive, because they are useful. Freeman and St Johnston illustrate this type of disingenuousness when they state:

Many scientists who work on model organisms, including both of us, have been known to contrive a connection to human disease to boost a grant or paper. It's fair: after all, the parallels are genuine, but the connection is often rather indirect. More examples will be discussed in later chapters [49].

Third, predict has a very specific meaning in science, indeed the concept of prediction is one thing that separate science from pseudoscience. By conflating useful and predict we diminish the respectability of science in general putting it more on the level of selling used cars. Finally, we again acknowledge that studying animals can lead to new knowledge. This point is not in dispute.

Thalidomide

Let us take and in depth look at one drug and the animal tests that could have been performed and evaluate what we would have learned from them. There are many examples of animal models giving results at extreme variance from humans and even from each other; thalidomide being but one, but thalidomide occupies a special place in history so we will use it. Thalidomide was a sedative prescribed to pregnant women in the late 1950 and early 1960s. The children of some of these women were born without limbs, a condition known as phocomelia. Could the thalidomide tragedy have been predicted and prevented on the basis of animal experimentation as Gad [29] and others have claimed? Consider the evidence. Schardein who has studied this tragedy has observed:

In approximately 10 strains of rats, 15 strains of mice, 11 breeds of rabbits, 2 breeds of dogs, 3 strains of hamsters, 8 species of primates and in other such varied species as cats, armadillos, guinea pigs, swine and ferrets in which thalidomide has been tested, teratogenic effects have been induced only occasionally [50].

We remind the reader that these results, and those below were from tests performed after thalidomide's affects had been observed in humans. Schardein also observes:

It is the actual results of teratogenicity testing in primates which have been most disappointing in consideration of these animals' possible use as a predictive model. While some nine subhuman primates (all but the bushbaby) have demonstrated the characteristic limb defects observed in humans when administered thalidomide, the results with 83 other agents with which primates have been tested are less than perfect. Of the 15 listed putative human teratogens tested in nonhuman primates, only eight were also teratogenic in one or more of the various species [51].

Manson and Wise summarized the thalidomide testing as follows:

An unexpected finding was that the mouse and rat were resistant, the rabbit and hamster variably responsive, and certain strains of primates were sensitive to thalidomide developmental toxicity. Different strains of the same species of animals were also found to have highly variable sensitivity to thalidomide. Factors such as differences in absorption, distribution, biotransformation, and placental transfer have been ruled out as causes of the variability in species and strain sensitivity [52].

Could the use of animal models have predicted thalidomide's adverse affects? Even if all the animals mentioned above were studied the answer is no. Different species showed a wide variety of responses to thalidomide. Once again, if you bet on enough horses you will probably find a winner or if you cherry pick the data you will find a winner. In the present case of thalidomide, human effects were already known so cherry picking is easy. The animal models for thalidomide discussed above were aimed at retroactively simulating known human effects. Even then not many animal models succeeded. If the human effects were unknown, what would the case have looked like from the standpoint of prediction? In this case, to pursue the horse racing analogy, we would have numerous horses to bet on without any idea which one would win. Certainly one will win (which is not a given when testing on animals in hopes of reproducing or guessing human response), but which one? We cannot know that until after the fact so how do we judge prospectively which horse to wager on or which animal model to choose? Which model species were relevant to the human case in advance of the gathering of human data? This is by no means a trivial question as evolutionary closeness does not increase the predictive value of the model. Caldwell points out that relatively small biological differences between test subjects can lead to very different outcomes:

It has been obvious for some time that there is generally no evolutionary basis behind the particular drug metabolizing ability of a particular species. Indeed, among rodents and primates, zoologically closely related species exhibit markedly different patterns of metabolism [53].

The thalidomide case illustrates why the overarching hypothesis that animals are predictive for humans is wrong. Again, this overarching hypothesis is in contrast to using animals as heuristic devices where the hypotheses drawn from them must be tested.

Even if we retrospectively picked all the animals that reacted to thalidomide as humans did, we still could not say these animals predicted human response as their history of agreeing with human response to other drugs varied considerably. Prediction vis-à-vis drug testing and disease research implies a track record. Single correct guesses are not predictions. Nonhuman primates are a good example of this. They more or less reacted to thalidomide as humans did (so we will give them the benefit of the doubt as corresponding to humans in this case). However, when tested with other drugs they predicted human response about as well as a coin toss. Add to all this the fact that all the animals whose offspring exhibited phocomelia consequent to the administration of thalidomide did so only after being given doses 25–150 times the human dose [54-56] and it does not appear that any animal, group of animals, or the animal model per se could have been used to predict thalidomide's teratogenicity in humans. (Ironically, it was the thalidomide tragedy that ushered in many of the regulatory requirements for using animals.)

Thalidomide's controversial history should not interfere with our analysis, as the history in question does not overlap with our issue. The controversy revolves around what animals were tested, whether pregnant animals were tested, what the drug company knew and when they knew it and so forth. This is immaterial, as we are analyzing the data as if it were available before releasing the drug. We are giving the animal model the maximum benefit of the doubt and what we find is that even if all the data available today had been available then, the decision to release the drug or not would not have been informed by animal tests. Karnofsky's law is relevant here. Any drug is teratogenic if given to the right animal at the right time. Given thalidomide's profile today, physicians would advise pregnant women not to take the drug, which is what physicians advise every pregnant woman about almost every nonlife-saving drug anyway, regardless of the results of animal tests.

The claim that thalidomide's affects were or could have been predicted by animals is an example of cherry picking the data.

The quantitative/qualitative controversy

We now move on to the quantitative/qualitative controversy. There is a tendency on the part of some researchers to see all differences between species as mere quantitative differences – presumably differences that can be compensated for in the context of prediction. Vineis and Melnick:

However, we disagree with Shanks and Pyles about the usefulness of animal experiments in predicting human hazards. Based on the darwinian observation of inter-species and inter-individual variation in all biological functions, Shanks and Pyles suggest that animal experiments cannot be used to identify hazards to human health. We claim that while the activity of enzymes may vary among individuals and among species, this does not indicate that critical events in disease processes occurring after exposure to hazardous agents differ qualitatively between animal models and humans.... For the most part, differences in how laboratory animals and humans metabolize environmental agents, or in the interactions of these agents with molecular targets (e.g., DNA, enzymes, or nuclear receptors), are quantitative in nature [27].

This is very much a Newtonian way of thinking and it ignores the effects of biological evolution and the fact that animals are complex systems.

Toxicologists have known for a long time that species differences may be quantitative or qualitative [53,57]. Consider a model substrate such as phenol. Humans and rats excrete phenol through two pathways, sulfate conjugation and glucuronic acid conjugation. There is a quantitative difference between humans and rats since the ratios of sulfate conjugation to glucuronic acid conjugation are different in each species. But there are qualitative differences too. Cats are incapable of glucuronic acid conjugation, and must excrete phenol via the sulfate pathway. For pigs the reverse is true, they cannot use the sulfate pathway, and must rely on glucuronic acid conjugation. (It is worth noting that there are at least seven metabolic pathways that are unique to primates – for example the aromatization of quinic acid [57].)

One lesson to be drawn from this example is that even if the same function is achieved by two species (e.g., excretion of phenol), it does not follow that they are doing so by the exact same underlying causal mechanisms. In the context of toxicology or pharmacology, these mechanistic differences can be important in assessing safety as well as pharmacological utility.

Other voices

We are not the only ones concerned about the predictive power of animal models. The scientific community itself is not marching in lock step when it comes to the predictive utility of animal models. We will take a moment to examine what some of these scientists actually say about the power of animal models to predict human responses. The following quotes from scientists (and the above quotes from Leavitt and Sankar), of course, prove nothing in the sense of mathematical proof, they nevertheless provide a window into the thinking of people well versed in the field and as such a reasonable person should take them seriously. They should give pause to those who think that the prediction issue is one where there is no reasonable controversy.

R.J. Wall and M. Shani observe:

The vast majority of animals used as models are used in biomedical preclinical trials. The predictive value of those animal studies is carefully monitored, thus providing an ideal dataset for evaluating the efficacy of animal models. On average, the extrapolated results from studies using tens of millions of animals fail to accurately predict human responses ... We conclude that it is probably safer to use animal models to develop speculations, rather than using them to extrapolate [58].

Curry points out:

The failure, in the clinic, of at least fourteen potential neuroprotective agents expected to aid in recovery from stroke, after studies in animal models had predicted that they would be successful, is examined in relation to principles of extrapolation of data from animals to humans [59].

The above proves two things. 1. At least some members of the animal experimentation community do know what the word predict means. 2. They also know animal models are not predictive. Their analysis and conclusions, which revealed the failure of animal models, was neither new nor surprising. History reveals the same.

Discrepancies between animal-human studies and even animal-animal studies date back centuries. Percival Pott showed coal tar was carcinogenic to humans in 1776. Yamagiwa and Ichikawa showed it was carcinogenic in some animals in 1915. But even then, rabbits did not respond as mice [60]. In 1980 there were roughly sixteen-hundred known chemicals that caused cancer in mice and rodents, but only approximately fifteen known to cause cancer in humans [61]. The Council on Scientific Affairs publishing in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1981 stated:

The Council's consultants agree that to identify carcinogenicity in animal tests does not per se predict either risk or outcome in human experience ... the Council is concerned about the hundreds of millions of dollars that are spent each year (both in the public and private sectors) for the carcinogenicity testing of chemical substances. The concern is particularly grave in view of the questionable scientific value of the tests when used to predict human experience [62]. (Emphasis added.)

David Salsburg of Pfizer wrote in 1983 that a report by the National Cancer Institute that examined 170 chemicals concluded that lifetime feeding studies using rodents lacked sensitivity and specificity. He stated:

If we restrict attention to long term feeding studies with mice or rats, only seven of the 19 human non-inhalation carcinogens (36.8%) have been shown to cause cancer. If we consider long term feeding or inhalation studies and examine all 26, only 12 (46.2%) have been shown to cause cancer in rats or mice after chronic exposure by feeding or inhalation. Thus the lifetime feeding study in mice and rats appears to have less than a 50% probability of finding known human carcinogens. On the basis of probability theory, we would have been better off to toss a coin [63]. (Emphasis added.)

Should we discard every drug that causes cancer in animals? Acetaminophen, chloramphenicol, and metronidazole are known carcinogens in some animal species [64,65]. Phenobarbital and isoniazid are carcinogens in rodents[60,66,67]. Does this mean they never should have been released to the market? Diphenylhydantoin (phenytoin) is carcinogenic to humans but not rats and mice [68-70]. Occupational exposure to 2-naphthylamine appears to cause bladder cancer in humans. Dogs and monkeys also suffer bladder cancer if exposed to 2-naphthylamine orally and mice suffer from hepatomas. It does not appear to have carcinogenic properties in rats and rabbits. These are qualitative differences due to differences in metabolism of aromatic amines [71]. It also appears that fewer genetic, epigenetic, or gene expression events are needed to induce cancer in rodents than are needed to induce cancer in humans [72-74]. (A good review of species differences in relation to carcinogenesis and why they exist is Anisimov et al. [72].)

Intraspecies differences also exist. Clofibrate, nafenopin, phenobarbital, and reserpine cause cancer in old but not young rats [68,75].

Should the above drugs that caused cancer in some animal have been banned? If the null hypothesis is that there is no association between animal carcinogens and human carcinogens strong enough so the animal model can be said to be predictive, then we see much evidence to support the null hypothesis but very little if any to refute it.

The point to be made here is that there are scientists (rather more than we have space to mention) who question the predictive and/or clinical value of animal-based research and history is on their side. As noted above, the opinions of scientists prove nothing in and of itself. Further, some of what we have presented could be dismissed as anecdotes but this would be a mistake. First, the studies referenced in the previous section are just that, scientific studies not anecdotes. Second, the examples presented are referenced, anecdotes are not (unless they are case reports and we must remember that thalidomide's downfall started as a series of case reports). But again we must ask where the burden of proof lies? We believe the second law of thermodynamics because there has never been an example of where it was wrong. Just one such example would falsify the law. If the animal model community claims the animal model is predictive, then they must explain the examples and studies that reveal it was not. Examples such as case reports count when disproving an assertion, especially when they are then supported with studies, but cannot be used by those making the claim as proof for their overarching hypothesis. That is how science works. We did not make the rules. In summary there is ample evidence to question, if not disprove entirely, the overarching hypothesis that animal models are predictive for humans.

To take the argument one step further, we must ask what conditions ought to be satisfied if animals are to serve as predictors of human biomedical phenomena. This is a question concerning theory and come under the heading of philosophy of science.

Theory

The requirements that need to be satisfied to get genuine causal predictions (as opposed to mere correlations) about members of one species on the basis of test results on members of another species are very difficult to satisfy (and may at best only be approximated in a few cases).

Models or a modality claiming predictability assumes identical causal properties. As researchers Carroll and Overmier explain in their recent book Animal Research and Human Health [76], and as LaFollette and Shanks also do in Brute Science[3], animals in biomedical research are frequently used as causal analogical models (CAMs). If the heart pumps blood in a chimpanzee, then we reason by analogy it will pump blood in humans also. If fen-phen is safe for the hearts of animals we reason by analogy it will be safe for human hearts as well [77]. Carroll and Overmier state:

When the experimenter devises challenges to the animal and studies a causal chain that, through analogy, can be seen to parallel the challenges to humans, the experimenter is using an animal model [76].

These are examples of using animals as CAMs or predictive models according to the traditionally used definition of the word prediction and as used by us in this article. We will discuss CAMs more fully in the section on theory.

Animal models in this sense involve causal analogical reasoning. First, what is a causal analogical model (CAM) and how does it involve causal analogical reasoning? The first condition that must be met in order for a thing to be considered a CAM is this: "X (the model) is similar to Y (the object being modelled) in respects {a...e}." If "X has additional property f, then while f has not been observed directly in Y, likely Y also has property f [3]." This latter claim is something that needs to be tested. In the present case it means the gathering of human data.

This first condition is not enough. For instance chimpanzees and humans have (a) an immune system, (b) have 99% of their DNA in common with humans, (c) contract viruses, etc. HIV reproduces very slowly in chimpanzees. We therefore expect HIV to reproduce slowly in humans. [3]. So if HIV replicates slowly in chimpanzees, animal experimenters reason by analogy that it will do the same in humans. This turns out to be false.

CAMs must satisfy two further conditions: (1) the common properties (a, ..., e) must be causal properties which (2) are causally connected with the property (f) we wish to project – specifically, (f) should stand as the cause(s) or effect(s) of the features (a, ..., e) in the model. When animals are used as causal analogical models the reasoning process taking us from results in the model to the system modelled is called causal analogical reasoning [3].

But it is not enough simply to point to similarities to justify cross-species extrapolation in the context of causal analogical reasoning. In complex, interactive systems such as organisms, we need to know whether there are relevant causal differences, i.e., causal disanalogies (with respect to mechanisms and pathways) that compromise the usefulness of the analogical reasoning. In other words, for a CAM to be predictive, there should be no causally-relevant disanalogies between the model and the thing being modeled. For example, there must be no properties {g, h, i} unique to either the model or the object modelled that causally interact with the common properties {a...e}, since such properties will likely compromise the predictive utility of the model.

The idea here is an old one. It concerns causal determinism – a concept that has played a fundamental role in the development of modern science. Causal determinism rests on two basic principles: (1) The Principle of Causality, according to which all events have causes; and (2) The Principle of Uniformity, according to which, for qualitatively identical system, all other things being equal, same cause is always followed by same effect.

These ideas played a role in our earlier discussion of Newtonian mechanics at the beginning of this essay. In a way, the whole issue of prediction comes down to the principle of uniformity. Are the animals used to make predictions about humans qualitatively identical to humans once allowances have been made for difference in body weight or surface area? No reasonable person who understands evolutionary biology, and who knows, for example, that rodents and humans have taken very different evolutionary trajectories since the lineages leading to modern humans and rodents, respectively, diverged over seventy million years ago, will expect qualitative identity. But perhaps qualitative identity is an ideal that can only be approximated. Are humans and their animal models sufficiently similar for approximate predictions to be made? The numerous studies referenced above, say no. Why is this the case?

Vertebrates are evolved complex systems. Such systems may manifest different responses to the same stimuli due to: (1) differences with respect to genes/alleles present; (2) differences with respect to mutations in the same gene (where one species has an ortholog of a gene found in another); (3) differences with respect to proteins and protein activity; (4) differences with respect to gene regulation; (5) differences in gene expression; (6) differences in protein-protein interactions; (7) differences in genetic networks; (8) differences with respect to organismal organization (humans and rats may be intact systems, but may be differently intact); (9) differences in environmental exposures; and last but not least; (10) differences with respect to evolutionary histories. These are some of the important reasons why members of one species often respond differently to drugs and toxins, and experience different diseases. These ten facts alone would be sufficient for some to conclude that animal models cannot be predictive for human; that transspecies extrapolation is impossible vis-à-vis drug response and disease research especially when analyzed in lights of the standards society today demands. (And the standards not set too high. If you think they are ask yourself if, had you taken rofecoxib and been harmed, would you have accepted a .99 PPV as acceptable?)

In biomedicine we do not have the mathematician's luxury of modeling humans and rodents by beginning, "let humans and rodents be spheres." If only it were that simple. Instead, what we do have are a lot of theoretical grounds for questioning the predictive utility of animal models. But of course, such theoretical reasoning may be dismissed as being just that. The real question is one of evidence. We have examined the evidence against and found it compelling but we should now examine the evidence cited as supporting the predictive nature of animals. We will now turn our attention to the famous Olson study, which many suppose to have settled the matters at hand firmly on the side of animal model being predictive for humans.

The Famous Olson Study

The Olson study [78] purports (and has certainly been cited in this regard) to provide evidence of the vast predictive utility of animal models in assessing human toxicity. In response to an article by Shanks et al. [79] Conn and Parker quoted the Olson study stating:

The authors have simply overlooked the classic study (Olson, Harry, et al.., 2000. "Concordance of the Toxicity of Pharmaceuticals in Humans and in Animals." Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 32, 56–67) that summarizes the results from 12 international pharmaceutical companies on the predictivity of animal tests in human toxicity. While the study is not perfect, the overall conclusion from 150 compounds and 221 human toxicity events was that animal testing has significant predictive power to detect most – but not all – areas of human toxicity [80]. (Emphasis theirs.)

We encourage the reader to examine the Olson Study in its entirety. Here we include some important representative paragraphs from the Olson study and our commentary will follow. We apologize for the length of the quote but due to the importance many place on the paper, we believe a thorough examination is justified.

This report summarizes the results of a multinational pharmaceutical company survey and the outcome of an International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Workshop (April 1999), which served to better understand concordance of the toxicity of pharmaceuticals observed in humans with that observed in experimental animals. The Workshop included representatives from academia, the multinational pharmaceutical industry, and international regulatory scientists.The main aim of this project was to examine the strengths and weaknesses of animal studies to predict human toxicity (HT). The database was developed from a survey which covered only those compounds where HTs were identified during clinical development of new pharmaceuticals, determining whether animal toxicity studies identified concordant target organ toxicities in humans ...

The results showed the true positive HT concordance rate of 71% for rodent and nonrodent species, with nonrodents alone being predictive for 63% of HTs and rodents alone for 43%. The highest incidence of overall concordance was seen in hematological, gastrointestinal, and cardiovascular HTs, and the least was seen in cutaneous HT. Where animal models, in one or more species, identified concordant HT, 94% were first observed in studies of 1 month or less in duration. These survey results support the value of in vivo toxicology studies to predict for many significant HTs associated with pharmaceuticals and have helped to identify HT categories that may benefit from improved methods ...

The primary objective was to examine how well toxicities seen in preclinical animal studies would predict actual human toxicities for a number of specific target organs using a database of existing information ...

Although a considerable effort was made to collect data that would enable a direct comparison of animal and human toxicity, it was recognized from the outset that the data could not answer completely the question of how well animal studies predict overall the responses of humans. To achieve this would require information on all four boxes in Fig. 1, and this was not practicable at this stage. The magnitude of the data collection effort that this would require was considered impractical at this stage. The present analysis is a first step, in which data have been collected pertaining only to the left column of Fig. 1: true positives and false negatives. [See ​figure 3.] By definition, therefore the database only contains compounds studied in humans (and not on those that never reached humans because they were considered too toxic in animals or were withdrawn for reasons unrelated to toxicity). Despite this limitation, it was deemed useful to proceed in the expectation that any conclusions that emerged would address some of the key questions and focus attention on some of the strengths and weaknesses of animal studies ...

Figure 3. Olsen figure 1.

A working party of clinicians from participating companies developed criteria for "significant" HTs to be included in the analysis. For inclusion a HT (a) had to be responsible for termination of development, (b) had to have resulted in a limitation of the dosage, (c) had to have required drug level monitoring and perhaps dose adjustment, or (d) had to have restricted the target patient population. The HT threshold of severity could be modulated by the compound's therapeutic class (e.g., anticancer vs anti-inflammatory drugs). In this way, the myriad of lesser "side effects" that always accompany new drug development but are not sufficient to restrict development were excluded. The judgments of the contributing industrial clinicians were final as to the validity of including a compound. The clinical trial phase when the HT was first detected and whether HT was considered to be pharmacology-related was recorded. HTs were categorized by organ system and detailed symptoms according to standard nomenclature (COSTART, National Technical Information Service, 1999) ...

Concordance by one or more species: Overall and by HT. Overall, the true positive concordance rate (sensitivity) was 70% for one or more preclinical animal model species (either in safety pharmacology or in safety toxicology) showing target organ toxicity in the same organ system as the HT ​[Fig.44].

This study did not attempt to assess the predictability of preclinical experimental data to humans. What it evaluated was the concordance between adverse findings in clinical data with data which had been generated in experimental animals (preclinical toxicology) [78]. (Emphasis added.)

Figure 4. Olsen figure 3.

Figure 5. Google Results

The Olson Study, as noted above, has been employed by researchers to justify claims about the predictive utility of animal models. However we think there is much less here than meets the eye. Here's why:

The study was primarily conducted and published by the pharmaceutical industry. This does not, in and of itself, invalidate the study. However, one should never lose sight of the fact that the study was put together by parties with a vested interest in the outcome. If this was the only concern, perhaps it could be ignored, however, as we will now show, there are some rather more serious flaws.

The study says at the outset that it is aimed at measuring the predictive reliability of animal models. Later the authors concede that their methods are not, as a matter of fact, up to this task. This makes us wonder how many of those who cite the study have actually read it in its entirety.

The authors of the study invented new statistical terminology to describe the results. The crucial term here is "true positive concordance rate" which sounds similar to "true predictive value" (which is what should have been measured, but was not). A Google search on "true positive concordance rate" yielded twelve results (counting repeats), all of which referred to the Olson Study (see figure ​figure5).5). At least seven of the twelve Google hits qualified the term "true positive concordance rate" with the term "sensitivity" – a well-known statistical concept. In effect, these two terms are synonyms. Presumably the authors of the study must have known that "sensitivity" does not measure "true predictive value." In addition you would need information on "specificity" and so on, to nail down this latter quantity. If all the Olson Study measured was sensitivity, its conclusions are largely irrelevant to the great prediction debate.

Any animals giving the same response as a human was counted as a positive result. So if six species were tested and one of the six mimicked humans that was counted as a positive. The Olson Study was concerned primarily not with prediction, but with retroactive simulation of antecedently know human results.

Only drugs in clinical trials were studied. Many drugs tested do not actually get that far because they fail in animal studies.

"...the myriad of lesser "side effects" that always accompany new drug development but are not sufficient to restrict development were excluded." A lesser side effect is one that affects someone else. While hepatotoxicity is a major side effect, lesser side effects (which actually matter to patients) concern profound nausea, tinnitus, pleuritis, headaches and so forth. We are also left wondering whether there was any independent scientific validity for the criteria used to divide side effects into major side effects and lesser side effects.

Even if all the data is good – and it may well be – sensitivity (i.e. true positive concordance rate) of 70% does not settle the prediction question. Sensitivity is not synonymous with prediction and even if a 70% positive prediction value rate is assumed, when predicting human response 70% is inadequate. In carcinogenicity studies, the sensitivity using rodents may well be 100%, the specificity, however, is another story. That is the reason rodents cannot be said to predict human outcomes in that particular biomedical context.

The Olson Study is certainly interesting, but even in its own terms it does not support the notion that animal models are predictive for humans. We think it should be cited with caution. A citation search (also performed with Google on 7/23/08) led us to 114 citations for the Olson paper. We question whether caution is being used in all these citations.

Conclusion

Mark Kac stated, "A proof is that which convinces a reasonable man." Even though the burden of proof is not on us to prove animal models are not predictive, we believe we have presented a proof that would convince a reasonable man.

There are both quantitative and qualitative differences between species. This is not surprising considering our current level of knowledge vis-à-vis evo devo, gene regulation and expression, epigenetics, complexity theory, and comparative genomics. Hypotheses generate predictions, which can be then proven true or false. Predict has a very distinct meaning in science and according to some is the foundation of science itself. Prediction does not mean retrospectively finding one animal that responded to stimuli like humans and therefore saying that the animal predicted human response nor does it mean cherry picking data nor does it mean occasionally getting the right answer.

When a concept such as "Animal models can predict human response" is accepted as true, it is not functioning as a hypothesis. We have referred to this as an overarching hypothesis but could have easily referred to it as an unfounded assumption. An assumption or overarching hypothesis might in fact be true but its truth must be proven. If a modality such as animal testing or using animals to predict pathophysiology in human disease is said to be a predictive modality, then any data generated from said modality should have a very high probability of being true in humans. Animal models of disease and drug response fail this criterion.

In medicine, even positive predictive values of .99 may be inadequate for some tests and animal models do not even roughly approximate that. Therefore, animal models are not predictors of human response. Some animals do occasionally respond to stimuli as do humans. However, how are we to know prospectively which animal will mimic humans? Advocates who maintain animals are predictive confuse sensitivity with prediction. Animals as a group are extremely sensitive for carcinogenicity or other biological phenomena. Test one hundred different strains or species and one is very likely to react like humans. But the specificity is very low; likewise the positive and negative predictive values. (Even if science did decide to abandon the historically correct use of the word predict, every time an animal-model advocate said animal species × predicted human response Y, she would also have to admit that animal species A, B, C, D, E and so forth predicted incorrectly. Thus justifying the use of animals because animal models per se to make our drug supply safer or predict facts about human disease would not be true.)

Some have suggested we should not criticize animal models unless we have better suggestions for research and testing [27]. It is not incumbent upon us to postpone criticizing animal models as not being predictive until predictive models such as in silico, in vitro or in vivo are available. Nor is it incumbent upon us to invent such modalities. Astrology is not predictive for foretelling the future therefore we criticize such use even though we have no notion of how to go about inventing such a future-telling device.

Some have also suggested that animal models may someday be predictive and that we should so acknowledge. While this is true in the sense that anything is possible it seems very unlikely, as genetically modified organisms have been seen to suffer the same prediction problems we have addressed [16,81-87] and, as mentioned different humans have very different responses to drugs and disease. Considering our current understanding of complex systems and evolution it would be surprising if one species could be used to predict outcomes in another at the fine-grained level where our study of disease and drug response is today and to the accuracy that society demands from medical science.

There are direct and indirect consequences to this misunderstanding of what prediction means. If we did not allow on the market any chemical or drug that causes cancer, or is teratogenic, or causes severe side effects in any species, then we would have no chemicals or drugs at all. Furthermore, there is a cost to keeping otherwise good chemicals off the market. We lose: treatments perhaps even cures; the income that could have been generated; and new knowledge that could have been gained from learning more about the chemical. These are not insignificant downsides. Since we now understand vis-à-vis personalized medicine that even humans differ in their response to drugs and disease and hence one human cannot predict what a drug will do to another human, it seems illogical to find models that are predictive using completely different species from humans. If we truly want predictive tests and research methods (and we do), it would seem logical to start looking intraspecies not interspecies.

References

D, Pielke RA Jr: Prediction in Science and Policy. In Prediction: Science, Decision Making, and the Future of Nature Edited by: Sarewitz D, Pielke RA Jr, Byerly R Jr. Island Press; 2000:11-22.

Quine W: Quiddities" An Intermittently Philosophical Dictionary Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2005.

LaFollette H, Shanks N: Brute Science: Dilemmas of animal experimentation London and New York: Routledge; 1996.

Greek R, Greek J: Specious Science New York: Continuum Int; 2002.

Xceleron [http://www.xceleron.com/metadot/index.pl]

Altman L: Who Goes First? The Story of Self-Experimentation in Medicine University of California Press; 1998.

Bruder CE, Piotrowski A, Gijsbers AA, Andersson R, Erickson S, de Stahl TD, Menzel U, Sandgren J, von Tell D, Poplawski A, Crowley M, Crasto C, Partridge EC, Tiwari H, Allison DB, Komorowski J, van Ommen GJ, Boomsma DI, Pedersen NL, den Dunnen JT, Wirdefeldt K, Dumanski JP: Phenotypically concordant and discordant monozygotic twins display different DNA copy-number-variation profiles. Am J Hum Genet 2008, 82:763-771.

Fraga MF, Ballestar E, Paz MF, Ropero S, Setien F, Ballestar ML, Heine- Suner D, Cigudosa JC, Urioste M, Benitez J, Boix-Chornet M, Sanchez-Aguilera A, Ling C, Carlsson E, Poulsen P, Vaag A, Stephan Z, Spector TD, Wu YZ, Plass C, Esteller M: Epigenetic differences arise during the lifetime of monozygotic twins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102:10604-10609.

Weiss ST, McLeod HL, Flockhart DA, Dolan ME, Benowitz NL, John- son JA, Ratain MJ, Giacomini KM: Creating and evaluating genetic tests predictive of drug response. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2008, 7:568-574.

Kaiser J: Gender in the pharmacy: does it matter? Science 2005, 308:1572.

Willyard C: Blue's clues. Nat Med 2007, 13:1272-1273.

Couzin J: Cancer research. Probing the roots of race and cancer. Science 2007, 315:592-594.

Holden C: Sex and the suffering brain. Science 2005, 308:1574. 14.

Salmon W: Rational Prediction. Philosophy of Science 1998:433-444.

Butcher EC: Can cell systems biology rescue drug discovery? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2005, 4:461-467.

Horrobin DF: Modern biomedical research: an internally self-consistent universe with little contact with medical reality? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2003, 2:151-154.

Pound P, Ebrahim S, Sandercock P, Bracken MB, Roberts I: Where is the evidence that animal research benefits humans? BMJ 2004, 328:514-517.

Editorial: The time is now. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2005, 4:613.

Littman BH, Williams SA: The ultimate model organism: progress in experimental medicine. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2005, 4:631-638.

Uehling M: Microdoses of Excitement over AMS, 'Phase 0' Trials. Bio-IT World 2006, 2006:.

Dixit R, Boelsterli U: Healthy animals and animal models of human disease(s) in safety assessment of human pharmaceu- ticals, including therapeutic antibodies. Drug Discovery Today 2007, 12:336-342.

Greek R, Greek J: Sacred Cows and Golden Geese: The Human Cost of Experiments on Animals New York: Continuum Int; 2000.

Greek J, Greek R: What Will We Do if We Don't Experiment on Animals. Continuum 2004.

FDA Issues Advice to Make Earliest Stages Of Clinical Drug Development More Efficient [http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ news/2006/NEW01296.html]

Knight A: The beginning of the end for chimpanzee experiments? Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2008, 3:16.

Shanks N, Pyles RA: Evolution and medicine: the long reach of "Dr. Darwin". Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2007, 2:4.

Vineis P, Melnick R: A Darwinian perspective: right premises, questionable conclusion. A commentary on Niall Shanks and Rebecca Pyles' "evolution and medicine: the long reach of "Dr. Darwin"". Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2008, 3:6.

28. Debate title: Animals are predictive for humans [http:video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8464924004908818871&q=mad ison+debate+animal&total=5&start=0&num=30&so =0&type=search&plindex=0]

Gad S: Preface. In Animal Models in Toxicology Edited by: Gad S. CRC Press; 2007:1-18.

Fomchenko EI, Holland EC: Mouse models of brain tumors and their applications in preclinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 2006, 12:5288-5297.

Hau J: Animal Models. In Handbook of Laboratory Animal Science Animal Models Volume II. 2nd edition. Edited by: Hau J, van Hoosier GK Jr. CRC Press; 2003:2-8.

Staff: Of Mice...and Humans. Drug Discovery and Development 2008, 11:16-20.

FDA panel recommends continued use of controversial diabetes drug [http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9903/26/rezulin.review.02/index.html]

Masubuchi Y: Metabolic and non-metabolic factors determining troglitazone hepatotoxicity: a review. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 2006, 21:347-356.

Topol EJ: Failing the public health – rofecoxib, Merck, and the FDA. N Engl J Med 2004, 351:1707-1709.

Heywood R: Clinical Toxicity – Could it have been predicted? Post-marketing experience. Animal Toxicity Studies: Their Rele- vance for Man 1990:57-67.

Spriet-Pourra C, Auriche M: Drug Withdrawal from Sale. New York 2nd edition. 1994.

Igarashi T: The duration of toxicity studies required to support repeated dosing in clinical investigation – A toxicologists opinion. In CMR Workshop: The Timing of Toxicological Studies to Sup- port Clinical Trials Edited by: Parkinson CNM, Lumley C, Walker SR. Boston/UK: Kluwer; 1994:67-74.

Sankar U: The Delicate Toxicity Balance in Drug Discovery. The Scientist 2005, 19:32.

Wilbourn J, Haroun L, Heseltine E, Kaldor J, Partensky C, Vainio H:

Response of experimental animals to human carcinogens: an analysis based upon the IARC Monographs programme. Car- cinogenesis 1986, 7:1853-1863.

Rall DP: Laboratory animal tests and human cancer. Drug Metab Rev 2000, 32:119-128.

Tomatis L, Aitio A, Wilbourn J, Shuker L: Human carcinogens so far identified. Jpn J Cancer Res 1989, 80:795-807.

Knight A, Bailey J, Balcombe J: Animal carcinogenicity studies: 1. Poor human predictivity. Altern Lab Anim 2006, 34:19-27.

Tomatis L, Wilbourn L: Evaluation of carcinogenic risk to humans: the experience of IARC. In New Frontiers in Cancer Cau- sation Edited by: Iversen. Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis; 2003:371-387.

IARC: IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Lyon: IARC; 1972.

IARC monographs programme on the evaluation of carcino- genic risks to humans [http://monographs.iarc.fr]

Haseman JK: Using the NTP database to assess the value of rodent carcinogenicity studies for determining human can- cer risk. Drug Metab Rev 2000, 32:169-186.

Gold LS, Slone TH, Ames BN: What do animal cancer tests tell us about human cancer risk?: Overview of analyses of the carcinogenic potency database. Drug Metab Rev 1998, 30:359-404.

Freeman M, St Johnston D: Wherefore DMM? Disease Models & Mechanisms 2008, 1:6-7.

Schardein J: Drugs as Teratogens CRC Press; 1976.

Schardein J: Chemically Induced Birth Defects. Marcel Dekker 1985.

Manson J, Wise D: Teratogens. Casarett and Doull's Toxicology 4th edition. 1993:228.

Caldwell J: Comparative Aspects of Detoxification in Mammals. In Enzymatic Basis of Detoxification Volume 1. Edited by: Jakoby W. New York: Academic Press; 1980.

Runner MN: Comparative pharmacology in relation to teratogenesis. Fed Proc 1967, 26:1131-1136.

Keller SJ, Smith MK: Animal virus screens for potential teratogens. I. Poxvirus morphogenesis. Teratog Carcinog Mutagen 1982, 2:361-374.

Staples RE, Holtkamp DE: Effects of Parental Thalidomide Treatment on Gestation and Fetal Development. Exp Mol Pathol 1963, 26:81-106.

Caldwell J: Problems and opportunities in toxicity testing arising from species differences in xenobiotic metabolism. Toxicol Lett 1992, 64–65(Spec No):651-659.

Wall RJ, Shani M: Are animal models as good as we think? Theriogenology 2008, 69:2-9.

Curry SH: Why have so many drugs with stellar results in laboratory stroke models failed in clinical trials? A theory based on allometric relationships. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2003, 993:69-74. discussion 79–81

Shubick P: Statement of the Problem. In Human Epidemiology and Animal Laboratory Correlations in Chemical Carcinogenesis Edited by: Coulston F, Shubick P. Ablex Pub; 1980:5-17.

Coulston F: Final Discussion. In Human Epidemiology and Animal Laboratory Correlations in Chemical Carcinogenesis Edited by: Coulston F, Shubick P. Ablex; 1980:407.

Council_on_Scientific_Affairs: Carcinogen regulation. JAMA 1981, 246:253-256.

Salsburg D: The lifetime feeding study in mice and rats – an examination of its validity as a bioassay for human carcinogens. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1983, 3:63-67.

IARC: IARC Working group on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Lyon 1972, 1–78:.

Sloan DA, Fleiszer DM, Richards GK, Murray D, Brown RA: Increased incidence of experimental colon cancer associated with long-term metronidazole therapy. Am J Surg 1983, 145:66-70.

Clemmensen J, Hjalgrim-Jensen S: On the absence of carcinogenicity to man of phenobarbital. In Human Epidemiology and Animal Laboratory Correlations in Chemical Carcinogenesis Edited by: Alex Pub. Coulston F, Shubick S; 1980:251-265.

Clayson D: The carcinogenic action of drugs in man and animals. In Human Epidemiology and Animal Laboratory Correlations in Chemical Carcinogenesis Edited by: Coulston F, Shubick P. Ablex Pub; 1980:185-195.

Anisimov V: Carcinogenesis and Aging Boca Rotan: CRC Press; 1987. 69. Anisimov V: Molecular and Physiological Mechanisms of Aging St Peters- burg: Nauka; 2003.

Dilman VM, Anisimov VN: Effect of treatment with phenformin, diphenylhydantoin or L-dopa on life span and tumour incidence in C3H/Sn mice. Gerontology 1980, 26:241-246.

IARC: Some aromatic amines, hydrazine and related sub- stances, n-nitroso compounds and miscellaneous alkylating agents. IARC monograph on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, Lyon 1974, 4:.

Anisimov VN, Ukraintseva SV, Yashin AI: Cancer in rodents: does it tell us about cancer in humans? Nat Rev Cancer 2005, 5:807-819.

Hahn WC, Weinberg RA: Modelling the molecular circuitry of cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2002, 2:331-341.

Rangarajan A, Weinberg RA: Opinion: Comparative biology of mouse versus human cells: modelling human cancer in mice. Nat Rev Cancer 2003, 3:952-959.

Anisimov VN: Age as a risk in multistage carcinogenesis. In Comprehensive Geriatric Oncology 2nd edition. Edited by: Balducci L, Ershler WB, Lyman GH. M E: Informa Healthcare. Taylor and Francis group; 2004:75-101. 157–178

Overmier JB, Carroll ME: Basic Issues in the Use of Animals in Health Research. In Animal Research and Human Health Edited by: Carroll ME, Overmier JB. American Psychological Association; 2001:5.

Kolata G: 2 Top Diet Drugs Are Recalled Amid Reports of Heart Defects. New York Times. New York 1997.

Olson H, Betton G, Robinson D, Thomas K, Monro A, Kolaja G, Lilly P, Sanders J, Sipes G, Bracken W, Dorato M, Van Deun K, Smith P, Berger B, Heller A: Concordance of the toxicity of pharmaceuticals in humans and in animals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2000, 32:56-67.

 Shanks N, Greek R, Nobis N, Greek J: Animals and Medicine: Do Animal Experiments Predict Human Response? Skeptic 2007, 13:44-51.

Conn P, Parker J: Letter. Animal research wars. Skeptic 2007, 13:18-19.

Van Regenmortel MH: Reductionism and complexity in molecular biology. Scientists now have the tools to unravel biological and overcome the limitations of reductionism. EMBO Rep 2004, 5:1016-1020.

Morange M: A successful form for reductionism. The Biochemist 2001, 23:37-39.

Morange M: The misunderstood gene Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2001.

8Mepham TB, Combes RD, Balls M, Barbieri O, Blokhuis HJ, Costa P, Crilly RE, de Cock Buning T, Delpire VC, O'Hare MJ, Houdebine LM, van Kreijl CF, Meer M van der, Reinhardt CA, Wolf E, van Zeller AM: The Use of Transgenic Animals in the European Union: The Report and Recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 28. Altern Lab Anim 1998, 

Liu Z, Maas K, Aune TM: Comparison of differentially expressed genes in T lymphocytes between human autoimmune disease and murine models of autoimmune disease. Clin Immunol 2004, 112:225-230.

Dennis C: Cancer: off by a whisker. Nature 2006, 442:739-741. 87. Houdebine LM: Transgenic animal models in biomedical research. Methods Mol Biol 2007, 360:163-202.

#science #research #animal model #critique #predictive value #genetics #epigenetics

[deborahdeshoftim5779]

More Panic Buying Stupidity

It’s hard not to run into someone who has been devastated by the panic buying pandemic. Just today, I heard about someone who had entirely run out of toilet paper, having to call his sister, who could only procure two boxes of man-sized tissues. All the stores were wiped clean. 

As mentioned beforehand, panic buying is stupid on its face. Were it only stupid, though! In fact, it is outright dangerous and will imperil the lives of millions in this country unless people put a cap to their greed and selfishness. 

Panic buying presumes that the country will face a shortage of toilet paper, soap, handwash, hand sanitiser, bread, and pasta as a result of coronavirus. This is pure nonsense. Coronavirus may affect shop assistants (who are being abused as I type this, trying to please greedy and aggressive customers), but as supermarkets have stated, there are *more* than enough food items and toiletries for everyone. 

Have the panic mob forgotten that Britain’s supermarkets waste *hundreds* of millions of pounds worth of food and other products each year, because of surplus? Yet they believe that the coronavirus will imperil the food and toiletries supply. 

Further stupidity can be found in the fact that hoarding toilet paper will not protect anyone from coronavirus. Firstly, there was no shortage of toilet paper (and other bathroom necessities) before panicking banshees raided the supermarket shelves. Secondly, coronavirus has no currently known impact on your digestive system. It is a respiratory disease. 

Meanwhile, we have millions of vulnerable people, many of whom are more likely to contract coronavirus, who are unable to access crucial resources. While some pack entire shelves of toilet paper into their bags, others are running out and cannot afford to buy more. If they can, they discover empty shelves in every store-- even those further away. 

I was lucky to get another packet of toilet roll yesterday, but only a 4-pack. I usually buy a 9 pack, which lasts a couple of weeks. Yesterday, the dazed shop assistants said that “people have gone mad”. So they have. Hoarding resources that will not protect them from the virus, as well as hoarding resources that other people also need to protect them from the virus, is not taking “precautions”. 

Many panic buyers seem to think that hoarding bread and tomatoes will assist them during a potential lockdown. What they have failed to realise is that these products have a shelf life which will not last several potential months of quarantine. They also fail to realise that in countries experiencing a lockdown, shops are still open. 

Why not? People will not suddenly stop needing groceries during a lockdown. This isn’t a nuclear apocalypse. We’re not at war. It will be necessary to continue to buy groceries during a potential lockdown. And for that to happen, we need stocks. All those who have hoarded will find much of their possessions useless. Even more ironically, by the time the danger has passed (and it will), they will be left with a giant, useless surplus of goods which could have gone to the needy. 

A word on soap etc. hoarding. Panic buyers seem to think that if they can clear the shelves of soap, they will not contract coronavirus. Of course, their hoarding means that many go without soap, meaning that they are unable to practice the highly effective method of handwashing. Without this, they are more vulnerable to contracting coronavirus and more likely to spread this unknowingly to others. 

Put simply, panic buying is endangering lives and making the potential number of infections *more* likely and the potential deaths *higher*. How people cannot see this is beyond me. If everyone bought a reasonable amount of soap, even a little extra, there would be *plenty* to go around. But never underestimate the power of greed, fear and stupidity in the midst of a crisis. 

Another aspect of panic buying: if we face a potential lockdown in Britain, the last thing we need are empty shops. As mentioned earlier, we need access to groceries, toiletries, etc. during the height of the infections phase. Panic buyers, with their head full of alarming statistics and blaring media reports (but no common sense or compassion), have forgotten this (or are entirely unaware of this). 

To survive coronavirus, we need a functioning economy. Essential shops must be open, and shop assistants kept in employment for as long as possible. This poses a risk (this can be mitigated using the lockdown methods of Italy and Spain), but will prevent the far more calamitous consequences of mass unemployment, increased dependency on welfare, and the health consequences associated with that. 

Panic buying will inevitably lead to less shopping in the future, which will damage the economy. A shop assistant wisely explained to me yesterday that people won’t want to buy anything in a couple of months. So how is hoarding sensible? It isn’t. Anyone with a brain can see that unstable economies often suffer in the face of epidemics, let alone a pandemic such as this. 

Supermarkets, dazed by the pestilence of greed (I have seen videos of fights over toilet paper in Australia) masquerading as “protection” and “precaution” (where does the NHS advice on coronavirus include hoarding 8 packets of toilet roll?), are now pleading with people not to stockpile resources. 

Much of the damage has already been done, however. When people automatically assume that predictions and statistics are unchangeable, see rising death tolls, and accept any speculation on social media as fact, they will ignore practical solutions (such as the highly effective advice to wash your hands more often).

Panic will not save *anyone* from coronavirus. In fact, it will (and already does) make the situation far worse. We survive during a crisis by keeping a cool head, taking precautions, and if necessary, more severe measures to fight the problem. Hoarding, fighting, spreading nonsense, exaggerating predictions, speculating and other nonsense has never stopped the spread of a disease and never will. 

I am embarrassed and disgusted by the wimpy greed shown by British people (as well as those in America and Australia). At the same time, I am encouraged by the large-scale condemnation of panic buying by sensible Britons (as well as other nationalities), as well as the courage and dignity being shown by the Italians, Spanish, South Koreans (and other nationalities). Where society isn’t run by greed and selfishness, people survive crises such as coronavirus. 

Panic buyers should take note. 

#coronavirus #wuhancoronavirus #covid_19 #panicbuying #stoppanicbuying #panicbuyer #panicbuyers #disease #virus #respiratorydisease #lungs #pneumonia #italy #lockdown #spain #WHO #health #mortalityrate #infection #soap #handwashing #washyourhands #nhs #england #america #australia #greed #consumerism

[the-girl-who-used-to-write]

Masterlist (Finally, I know)

Series names will be in bold

Character and ship names will be in italics

Teen Wolf

Choices of Love (Incomplete) (Scott McCall and Stiles Stilinski) Chapter 1 

Which Alpha (Incomplete) (Scott McCall and Theo Raeken) Chapter 1 Chapter 2

Manipulation (complete) (Theo Raeken) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3  Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7

You Should Have Told Me (Liam Dunbar)

You’re Back (Liam Dunbar)

She’ll Be Loved (Scott McCall)

It’s Her Life (Theo Raeken)

You Cannot Leave Me (Liam Dunbar) (16 Days Of Songs)

Bad Things (Theo Raeken) (16 Days Of Songs)

Halo (Scott McCall) (16 Days Of Songs)

Smile (Stiles Stilinski) (16 Days Of Songs)

I’ll Help You (Brett Talbot)

Lucky (Stiles Stilinski)

Another Species (Derek Hale)

Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing (Scott McCall)

Save Me (Peter Hale)

Feelings For The Alpha (Peter Hale)

Not My Family (Scott McCall)

Honourable Injuries (McCall Pack)

Big Brother, Little Brother (Stiles Stilinksi)

Down To Gown Town (Stiles Stilinski)

Where Did You Go? (New Year, New Prompts) (Void Stiles)

Ha, Yeah, You’re Not Doing That (Complete) (Stiles Stilinski) (Part 2)

Familial Warnings (Liam Dunbar)

Not Our Last Hurrah (Scott McCall and Stiles Stilinski)

Not So Evil Stepsister (Stiles Stilinski)

Charmed

Costumes (Chris Halliwell)

Huntress (Chris Halliwell)

Creepy and Kooky (Complete) (Chris Halliwell) Prologue  Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5  Ending 1 Ending 2

We Could Have Lost You (Chris Halliwell)

I’m Here Now (Chris Halliwell)

Baby Steps (Chris Halliwell)

Is She Ok? (Halliwell Sisters)

I’ll Be Back (Chris Halliwell)

Damn, You’re Pretty Scary (Cole Turner)

Who’s The Scared Girl? (Complete) (Cole Turner) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 

Sorry For My Evil Brother (Chris Halliwell)

Let’s Be Bad Together (Chris Halliwell)

Right Back At You (Chris Halliwell)

I Fell In Love With The Devil (Cole Turner)

Just A User (Cole Turner)

Memories (Chris Halliwell and Wyatt Halliwell)

Hunting For My Heart (Chris Halliwell and TVD Crossover)

Never Stop (Chris Halliwell)

The Feeling Of Power (Chris Halliwell)

Taken With You (Cole Turner)

The Best Brother (Chris Halliwell and Wyatt Halliwell)

Try To Get Along (Chris Halliwell)

Never Stop (Chris Halliwell)

How They React To Your Death (Preference) (Chris Halliwell and Cole Turner)

My One And Only Demon (Chris Halliwell)

Advice Columnist (Chris Halliwell)

Saved By A Demon (Wyatt Halliwell)

Liking You But Being Scared Of Wyatt Would Include: (Chris Halliwell) (Headcanon)

Full Moon Routine (The Sisters)

In The Future (Wyatt Halliwell)

Treat You Better (Chris Halliwell)

In A World Of Our Own (Wyatt Halliwell and Supernatural Crossover)

Black And White Movie (New Year, New Prompts) (Chris Halliwell)

Whoever I Want (New Year, New Prompts) (Chris Halliwell)

How Many Times?! (New Year, New Prompts) (Wyatt Halliwell)

Don’t You Remember? (New Year, New Prompts) (Chris Halliwell)

Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Was This Just A One Time Thing? (Spike)

Try To Be Subtle (Spike)

It’s A New Life For Us (Spike)

That’s What I Do (Spike)

Big Bad Wolf (Oz Osbourne)

Piece Of Work (Spike)

Old-Fashioned (Spike)

My Sister?! (Spike)

Poetry In Motion (Spike)

Vampires Need Saving Too (Angel)

The Best Pair Of Matchmakers (Xander Harris)

Cute Date (Spike)

Secret Vampire Lover (Spike)

Courage (Doyle)

Yes, I Bought You A Leather Jacket (New Year, New Prompts) (Spike)

Peter Pan 2003

Out Loud (Peter Pan)

Nothing Can Break Us Apart (James Hook)

Never Gonna Land (incomplete) (Peter Pan) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 

Once Upon A Time

No Longer Lost (Peter Pan)

Really, Him?! (Peter Pan)

You’re Still Perfect (Peter Pan)

Animals (Peter Pan) (16 Days Of Songs)

Finally (Peter Pan)

Boyfriend (Peter Pan)

Puppy Love (Peter Pan)

The Truth (Once Upon A Time)

You’ll Never Take Us Alive (New Year, New Prompts) (Peter Pan)

The Walking Dead

Back Off (Carl Grimes)

I’m Sorry, Are You Ok? (Mitch)

I Choose (Mitch and Louis)

Guns Are So Out Of Style (Carl Grimes)

American Horror Story

Co-Leaders (Kai Anderson)

Meant To Be Yours (Tate Langdon)

Devil’s Playground (Tate Langdon) (16 Days Of Songs)

You’re Not A Freak To Us (Jimmy Darling)

You’re Everything I Ever Wanted (Jimmy Darling)

Never Meant To Hurt You (Michael Langdon)

No Dinner This Time (Michael Langdon)

We’re Not Going Back There (Kit Walker)

Powerful Scares (Michael Langdon)

First Day Of School (Coven)

Toxic (Tate Langdon)

Happy And All (New Year, New Prompts) (Kyle Spencer)

High?! (New Year, New Prompts) (Tate Langdon)

It (2017)

In Derry, No One Can Hear You Scream (incomplete) (Loser’s Club) Chapter 1  Chapter 2

You Couldn’t Guess? (Henry Bowers)

Hope For The Underrated Youth (Bowers Gang)

Original Me (Henry Bowers)

How Much?! (New Year, New Prompts) (Bill Denbrough)

Nowhere Boys

Trust Fund Baby (Sam Conte)

Doctor Who

That’s Me! (10th Doctor)

Romeo and Juliet

A Rose By Any Other Name (incomplete) (Romeo Montague) Chapter 1  Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4

Shadowhunters/The Mortal Instruments

Shadows Follow Me Home (Sebastian Verlac)

You’ll Be In My Heart (Jace Herondale) (16 Days Of Songs)

Just Say (Alec Lightwood) (16 Days Of Songs)

Let’s Be Friends (Alec Lightwood)

Narnia

Princess Of The Telmarines (complete) (Edmund Pevensie) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 

Knight In Shining Armour (New Year, New Prompts) (Edmund Pevensie)

Gotham

The Wayne Girl (Complete) (Jerome Valeska) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3  Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7

Get Away From My Daughter You Bastard (Jonathan Crane)

Don’t Be Scared Of Me (complete) (Jonathan Crane) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 

Marvel

Legendary (incomplete) (Peter Parker) Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3

He’d Be Proud Of Us (Peter Parker)

I Miss My Old Friends (Peter Parker)

Monster (Erik Lehnsherr) 

Hold Onto Me (Logan Howlett)

Your Dream Will Be My Dream (Warren Worthington III) (16 Days Of Songs)

You’re My Best Friend (Peter Parker) (16 Days Of Songs)

Forgotten (Charles Xavier)

I’m With You (Peter Parker)

Somebody Else (Erik Lehnsherr)

Stay With Me (Erik Lehnsherr)

Gravity (Charles Xavier)

Sleep Peacefully (Scott Summers)

Coward (Charles Xavier)

Ocean Eyes (Erik Lehnsherr)

Get Well Soon (Stephen Strange)

Motorbike (Scott Summers)

E-Boy (New Year, New Prompts) (Peter Parker)

Game Of Thrones

Hellfire (Joffrey Baratheon)

Thank You Kind Sir (Renly Baratheon)

Bates Motel

It’s Always Been You (Dylan Massett)

Harry Potter

I Have No Choice (Draco Malfoy)

Together Or Apart (Fred Weasley)

Misguided Ghosts (Golden Trio)

Slipped Away (Cedric Diggory)

Wish You Were Here (Sirius Black)

Pictures Off The Wall (Draco Malfoy)

Because Of You (Sirius Black)

The Tournament (Cedric Diggory)

How Much Did You Pay? (New Year, New Prompts) (Draco Malfoy)

Friends

Are You Sure About This (Joey Tribbiani)

Baby Of The Group (Joey Tribbiani)

You

How Predictable (Incomplete) (Joe Goldberg) Chapter 1  

Bohemian Rhapsody

10 Things I Hate About You (Roger Taylor)

The Society

I Have A Separate Masterlist For This

NCIS Los Angeles

Welcome To The Madhouse (Platonic Team)

Rescue (G Callen)

The Umbrella Academy

Ghost Of You (Ben Hargreeves)

Mona Lisa (Diego Hargreeves)

Paralyzed (Klaus Hargreeves)

Me! (Klaus Hargreeves) (16 Days Of Songs)

Heart By Heart (Five Hargeeves) (16 Days Of Songs)

I See Dead People (Klaus Hargreeves)

Z-Nation

Shallow (10k) (16 Days Of Songs)

From The Start (Murphy)

Be More Careful (Murphy)

The Vampire Diaries

A Thousand Years (Damon Salvatore) (16 Days Of Songs)

Mysterious Feelings (Matt Donovan)

Perks Of Being His Girlfriend (Jeremy Gilbert)

What A Buzzkill (Damon Salvatore and Enzo St John)

Hunting For My Heart (Jeremy Gilbert and Charmed Crossover)

Pushy (Damon Salvatore and Enzo St John)

This Complicates Things (Matt Donovan and Jeremy Gilbert)

Feel Like Arguing (Kol Mikaelson)

Gifts (Stefan Salvatore)

Why Don’t You Care (Damon Salvatore)

Always In Trouble (Klaus Mikaelson)

How They React To Your Death (Preference) (Kol Mikaelson and Jeremy Gilbert)

Study Buddies (Jeremy Gilbert)

Vampire Twin (Elijah Mikaelson)

Listen (Klaus Mikaelson)

The Only Mikaelson For Me (Kol Mikaelson)

Regular Customer (Kai Parker)

Memories Lost (Damon Salvatore)

Date Ruined (Kol Mikaelson and Enzo St John)

All I’m Saying (New Year, New Prompts) (Damon Salvatore)

So, What Are You Gonna Say? (New Year, New Prompts) (Damon Salvatore)

Pretty Little Liars

Old Friends (Toby Cavanaugh)

Six Feet Under (Ezra Fitz)

Never Meant (Jason DiLaurentis)

All I Wanted (Toby Cavanaugh)

I Miss You (Jason DiLaurentis)

Just My Imagination (The Girls)

Skins UK

Uptown Girl (James Cook)

On The Bus (Sid Jenkins)

Our Last Moments (Chris Miles)

Karma Hit You Hard (Tony Stonem)

Perfect Wedding Song (New Year, New Prompts) (Tony Stonem)

Maze Runner

Piggy Back (Newt)

Master Chef (Newt)

Into The Unknown (New Year, New Prompts) (Aris)

Supernatural

In A World Of Our Own (Dean Winchester and Charmed Crossover)

Grimm

Fairy Tales (Nick Burkhardt)

Our Kinds (New Year, New Prompts) (Nick Burkhardt)

The Hunger Games

Panic Room (New Year, New Prompts) (Finnick Odair)

Supernatural

Devil On My Shoulder (New Year, New Prompts) (Lucifer)

#masterlist #master list #charmed #teen wolf #imagine #imagines #x reader #series #fanfic #fanfiction #harry potter #bates mote #game of thrones #marvel #gotham #narnia #shadowhunters #mortal instruments #the mortal instruments #romeo and juliet #doctor who #nowhere boys #it (2017) #american horror story #the walking dead #once upon a time #peter pan 2003 #buffy the vampire slayer #friends #you

[eternityunicorn]

Elijah’s Eternity: New Orleans - Part Eighteen

Author: eternityunicorn 

Genre: Romance/Drama/AU

Pairing: Elijah Mikaelson x OC

Warnings: Violance, Smut (*Smut chapters marked +18)

Summary: Sequel to the AU Elijah’s Eternity - Ten years have passed, a mournful Elijah has finally started to move on without his lady. In that time, he has gained a reunited family and has also found a new lady love. Yet, all is not well as danger comes for the smallest member of the Mikaelson family: Hope, and it prompts Niklaus to call upon the white goddess, drawing her back into Elijah’s life. As they reunite, can Elijah really say he’s truly moved on?

NOTE: OC and original elements are from my up and coming novel series! Masterlist link to all my fics is in my blog profile. Thanks and happy reading!

———————————————————————————————————

Six months went by quickly since Elijah and his lady went to live at the loft across the river from the French Quarter of New Orleans in Algiers. In that time, their enemies had been quiet. He hadn’t had any more visitations from dead exes. There also hadn't been much activity from Bruno; though there had been a few reports of witches being murdered for their powers in Spain and France, just as Eternity had predicted there would be.

Though she hadn’t been able to help those witches from their deaths, she immediately sent word to the Underground Agency to order them to send out soldiers to protect the covens worldwide. The superhuman agents would be able to dissuade Bruno from killing more witches, at least for a time. 

This allowed Eternity to remain inactive, giving her the opportunity for some downtime with Elijah. He was grateful for it as well, happy to not spend his days in constant peril. He enjoyed spending his time with his lady, as an ordinary couple would. 

They went places like to the movies or out to dinner. Sometimes they would stay inside and he would cook for them. Then they would curl up together and he would read Shakespeare to her or they would play chess or card games, of which Eternity proved to be quite skilled at both activities. Of course, they also made love frequently too, in between all the mundane human activities they enjoyed doing together. 

Life was good and Elijah found himself at peace, a concept that had been elusive to him for most of his immortal life. 

All the while during those wonderful months of tranquility, he planned his wedding with his bride-to-be. They talked about it almost as frequently as they made love. They had decided on a wedding in Japan, the homeland of Eternity’s family. His lady spoke of the elusive cousin he had yet to meet whom lived there - the very one that  the old man, Mr. Mitchell, had mentioned seeing once, all those years ago. She told him that her cousin could perform the ceremony, though Kaname would want to meet him first.

From there, they spoke of whom to invite. Elijah had assumed the guest list would be quite long since she was the Universal Queen. Surely there had been diplomats and councilmen that needed to attend, as was custom to how he knew royal weddings went. Yet, Eternity surprised him by saying she wanted the affair to be small and intimate with his family and hers in attendance only. It was unconventional, but Elijah wasn’t one to speak on the matter. It simply wasn’t his place.

His lady did inform him that after the wedding, they would need to meet with the other rulers in the Universal Kingdom, as to establish him as her consort. The rest of the Immortal Universe needed to know the man who would hold the second positioned authority in her kingdom to her. However, it could wait until after they were married.

Of course both their families had been informed of the upcoming nuptials. Everyone was excited and happy for them. With the Mikaelsons, congratulatory drinks had been passed around, complete with toasts to the happy couple. Elijah was unsure how Eternity’s family took the news as the announcement was sent out via telepathic message, but she told him that everyone was surprised, yet receptive to her upcoming wedding and those whom hadn’t met Elijah were excited to meet the man whom Eternity was in love with. At least, that was what she told him.

From venue to decor, they talked about their visions for the wedding - and the future as well. 

One evening as they sat together at the kitchen island sharing a meal that he had cooked himself, Elijah found himself mentioning to her, “You know, my only disappointment in this union is that you and I will never be able to have children of our own. Of course I will love the ones you already have, do not misunderstand me, but it would have been wonderful to also have our own.”

Eternity didn’t seem to share in his disappointment when he spoke this truth. In fact, she grinned slyly at him, as she mysteriously said, “Who says we cannot have children together?”

Elijah gazed at her confusedly, “What do you mean? You know, vampires cannot procreate.” 

She laughed lightly and looked at him as if he were ridiculous. When he frowned in displeasure at her, she quickly explained, “When I cast the spell to upgrade you and your family, it will rewrite the dark magic that flows through you all. You will no longer be bound by the natural balance rules of this world, meaning I can allow you the ability to procreate, while retaining your vampirism. I can grant the same to your siblings as well as Marcel and Sage. I’m sure Rebekah will be jumping at the chance as she’s always wanted a family.”

Elijah had been rendered speechless by what she told him. He stared at her with his mouth agape and his food momentarily forgotten. He couldn’t believe what he was hearing at first.

Then it hit him.

They could have children? They could have children!

He was out of his chair and pulling Eternity out of hers. He collected her in his arms and held her tightly to him from the elation he felt towards the information she had just given him. He pulled back with what was surely the biggest grin on his face and laid kisses all over Eternity’s face and head. He then hugged her to him again.

“If this is how happy you are finding out it’s possible,” Eternity giggled at him, “just how excited are you going to get when it actually happens?”

“I will be the happiest man ever to have lived when the day you tell me you’re carrying my child comes,” Elijah spoke softly, taking her face in his hands tenderly. “Nothing, aside from you becoming my wife, would make me happier.”

Eternity beamed at him, “Well, I am glad that you’re keen to the idea of having children.”

“Of course,” he responded eagerly. “I am like my sister in that regard. I’ve always wanted a family of my own, but I never thought it possible. So I never allowed myself to desire such, believing it would forever be out of my reach,” he kissed her lips tenderly, “but with you, my darling Eternity, everything is possible. My happiness, my hope for the future - everything lays right here with you.”

“I cannot cry, as it is a physical impossibility,” she told him, her voice trembling with emotion, “but if I could, I would be in the joy your words bring me. I am moved by them. Truly. And I very much feel the same way. I am not alive unless I am with you, my love. I never want to be anywhere you are not. I look forward to whatever the future has in store for us, including whatever children we may have.”

He kissed her again, her words moving him as well. He was truly turning into the sentimental old fool that Niklaus always claimed him to be, but he couldn’t help it. He loved this woman so completely. 

“With how insatiable I find myself with you, Sweetheart,” Elijah grinned teasingly, “I think we shall have a large brood. No doubt, I shall have you in a constant barefoot and pregnant state with how much I always want you.” He paused and thought about it for a moment, before nodding, “Yes, a dozen of them, I predict.”

Eternity’s eyes widened at him and then she laughed, “Is that right? Well, we shall see, my love.”

She kissed him this time with a smile upon her lips. Then she pulled back to wind her arms around his neck as she suggested, “I think we should go out tonight. I’m thinking perhaps you can take me dancing, as a celebration of this happy time of our lives.”

“That sounds like a delightful idea, my darling,” he replied, then nodded to their half eaten meals. “We should probably finish eating first, though. Then I’ll take you to this little club I know of here in Algiers, called Saint James. I think you’ll enjoy it.”

“Agreed,” nodded Eternity.

With that, they sat and finished their respective meals quickly. All the while, they shot smiles at each other and touched affectionately on occasion. 

Elijah was simply over the moon, knowing that one day, he’d be able to have children with the woman he loved more than anything. He’d finally have the family that he so desired, and quite frankly, looked forward to Rebekah learning of this gift Eternity planned on bestowing them all. 

He knew with absolutely certainty that his baby sister would be as ecstatic as he was about the possibility of having a family. He could see her face light up and the tears of happiness she would surely shed upon hearing about Eternity’s gift. 

As soon as they were done eating, Eternity did the clean up by magical means. A quick snap and everything was back to a tidy and organized state. 

Then Elijah, whom had been dressed in his typical suit and tie ensemble, requested his lady magic him up a more casual attire. She did as he asked and conjured a simper outfit for him that consisted of dark blue jeans, a olive green long sleeved shirt, and brown dress boots. 

“Thank you, Sweetheart,” he grinned at her in approval of her magical choices.

She grinned back and then changed her own clothes. She went from her typical flowing maxi dress to a short light gray sweater dress that was casual and a pair of heeled black ankle boots. Her long, ankle length hair magicked itself into a braid with little pink flower accents weaves into it. She also wore large silver hoop earrings and a silver necklace with a unicorn pendant upon it. 

Elijah found her casual attire more alluring than her typical wears. Perhaps it was because she looked so ordinary. There was simply something attractive about the humanness of her appearance that he couldn’t quite explain. 

Whatever it was that had him especially smitten, one thing that he knew for sure was that tonight they would be ordinary people, just and man and his woman, going out to have a good time. Nothing was more attractive than that fact.

Elijah held his hand out to Eternity upon her change of clothing and she took it without hesitation. Threading his fingers with hers, he lead her out of the loft. 

The Saint James Infirmary jazz club wasn’t that far from where they lived and it was an easy walk there. The evening was warm and dry, so Elijah decided that a walk would only make the night more perfect. 

The entire way he discussed baby names with Eternity, whom humored him in his excitement  toward the idea of having children. He had told her that if they had a boy, they would name their son Henrik in honor of his deceased brother. She had suggested Katerina for a girl, which had given Elijah pause. Katerina was his ex Katherine’s true name and he wasn’t sure how he felt about naming his daughter with Eternity after her. 

“I know that you have a former lover named that, but I absolutely adore the name,” Eternity told him, when he gazed at her oddly as they walked on. “It is a regal name, one befit a princess, and our daughter would be exactly that.”

“Yes, but there are many other names to that effect, Sweetheart,” he said, not outright rejecting her name choice, but certainly not giving it much merit. “Arianna, for example. That is a fine name for a princess of the highest order.” He grinned at her.

“Well, keep an open mind about it, yes?” She replied.

“As my lady wishes,” he nodded.

Then after a small companionable silence, Eternity changed the subject by saying, “I want us to marry soon.”

“Oh?”

“Aye.”

“And why is that, Sweetheart?”

“Because on the night of our wedding, I wish to perform the higher order ceremony upon you and your family,” Eternity told him, just as they were arriving at the Saint James club. 

They paused outside the club with Elijah turning to her.

“It is imperative that you and yours are upgraded as soon as possible,” the immortal queen explained without prompt. “It won’t be much longer before Bruno grows weary of killing witches and other Earth-based supernatural beings for power. He’ll make another strike against us sooner or later and you all need to be ready for it. So what better time to perform the ceremony then at our wedding, when two families become one.”

Elijah thought about it and didn’t see any reason to reject the idea. She certainly had a point. So long as Bruno was out there, his family was more vulnerable than they would be if Eternity preformed the higher order ceremony and upgraded them, so they could have some protection against their common enemy.

“Alright,” he agreed. “How about this? Let’s get married in three weeks. That should be enough time to get everything prepared and ready. Then at the end of the wedding, we’ll perform the other ceremony.”

Eternity smiled, “Yes, that sounds splendid.”

With the arrangement made, Elijah lead her into the club. 

Everything was in full swing inside. Like with most clubs, the music was obnoxiously loud and chatter from the patrons just as much. There were bodies all over; many were on the dance floor, while others stood at the bar or at the high top tables chatting with each other. The energy was high and it was the perfect place to celebrate, especially since they were amongst the supernatural community and they didn’t have to pretend to be human.

Immediately did Eternity drag Elijah onto the dance floor, swinging her hips the the uptempo jazz beat once they were amongst the other dancers. He watched her move, admiring the carefree way she smiled at him, before he fell into step with her. He wrapped her arms around his neck, kissing the flesh of her arm as he did, before letting his hands fall to her hips as they moved to n perfect sync to the music’s rhythm.

“This reminds me of our time in Chicago, at the Blood Rose Club,” Eternity said to him, in a normal voice as his vampire hearing allowed him to hear her perfectly without her having to shout. “Though we did a different kind of dancing that night.”

At her filthy grin she gave him, Elijah found himself returning it in kind. “Oh yes, my sweet, I remember it quite well,” he replied. “With you, Sweetheart, my inhibitions are certainly nonexistent. I have no self-control where you are concerned and I’ll gladly take you anywhere, anytime, no matter where we are or who is around.”

He pulled her hips against his for emphasis, enjoying the wide eyed expression on her face from the suddenness of his movements. She smirked mischievously at him in response, before kissing him hotly in the middle of the dance floor. Her tongue invaded his mouth, tasting him throughly, which he let her do to her contentment. His desire for her rose as it always did and he found his grip on her hips tightening as she kissed him. 

“Oh yes,” Elijah murmured, as he pulled back, before he really did lose control on the dance floor, “we are definitely having a large brood of children, especially if you plan to always kiss me like that, Sweetheart.”

Eternity giggled lightly and shook her head at him.

“Ah, look at the happy couple,” called a familiar voice suddenly - Kol!

Elijah and his lady both turned to see the younger Mikaelson and his witch lover, Davina Claire. It seemed he wasn’t the only one whom had the idea of a date at the jazz club. The older Original grinned at his brother, “Kol! what a pleasant surprise. It seems Mikaelsons think alike, Brother.”

“Yes, it’s good to see you, Elijah,” Kol replied. “We haven’t seen you since you announced your engagement to this lovely creature here.” He smiled charmingly at Eternity, who simply smiled back politely. “Come, Brother,” the younger Mikaelson turned back to Elijah, “let us have a drink together, while our women enjoy the music.”

Elijah looked at Eternity for approval. He didn’t want to leave her side, if she didn’t him to, but she only nodded and let him go with a parting flirtatious wink. 

He smirked in return, before leaving her with Davina and following Kol to the bar. They ordered a bourbon each and leaned back against the bar top, observing their ladies as they laughed and danced together, like old friends. 

Elijah found it a mix of oddity and fascination how Eternity, despite being thousands of years old looked much younger than Davina, whom was a young adult now. Her youthful exterior was something he always overlooked since he knew she was in reality much older than him. He had to wonder what he looked like to others with the almost childlike queen on his arm, when he himself looked much older - having been pushing thirty for a thousand years. 

“So, when are you two going to walk down the aisle?” Kol asked him, bringing him out his wonderings. 

“Ironic that you ask that, we only just decided this night to wed three weeks from now in Japan,” Elijah answered, sipping from his glass as he did. “Speaking of which, do me a favor and tell our siblings for me? I’ll have Eternity send word to Niklaus, Hayley, and Hope.”

Kol nodded, “Sure, Elijah. It will be my pleasure to play messenger.”

“Tell them that I’ll be coming by the compound in a week, too, because I have something of great importance to tell all of you,” he told his little brother. “So, remember to be there, Kol.”

“Yes, big brother,” the younger Mikaelson sighed exasperatedly. “Are there any more orders you wish to bark at me or are you quite through?”

Elijah eyed his brother with a small smile, taking another sip of bourbon. He said nothing in response. 

Alternatively, he gaze returned to his lady on the dance floor. He watched her move with Davina as they wiggled about to the beat of the live band. He enjoyed the view, noticing the way Eternity would glance back at him mischievously, as if she had known he was watching all along.

“You know, you seem different around her,” Kol observed, gesturing to the ethereal beauty. “There’s a light in your eyes, brother, that I have never seen before. You certainly seem less brooding, more alive. Perhaps Eternity has done what no other has been able to and finally loosened the stick that’s been up your ass for centuries.” He smirked over his glass at him, as he drank heartily from it. 

Elijah chose to ignore his smart mouthed remarks and focused on his genuine observations instead. “You are right, Kol. Eternity has changed me. I am not the same man with her,” he said with an adoring smile at his lady across the way. “In all my long existence, I have only known darkness and misery with small moments of happiness. We all have, as a matter of fact. Our brother usually being the reason for such, but my relationship wut Eternity is something he cannot ruin, despite having come close once. No, I have finally found my peace, my light - and it is all in her.” He nodded toward the dancing goddess.

“How sentimentally poetic,” his little brother replied, gazing at his own woman, “but I am happy for you. It seems we have both found our lights in our dark, dark world.”

“Yes, it would seem so.”

The two brothers fell into a companionable silence, enjoying the sights of their respective lovers having fun on the dance floor. It brought Elijah joy to see Eternity happy. 

However, it seemed the light-hearted evening wasn’t meant to last. There was suddenly a terrible shift in the club’s atmosphere in the form of a sinister presence, of whom caught everyone’s attention as they were all supernatural and sensitive to the auras of dark entities. 

At first, Elijah’s heart nearly stopped at the sight of the dark man that had come to call. It wasn’t possible, he thought in a fearful panic. The man looked like Loki! Yet, he knew that wasn’t right. Loki was dead, despite his recent trickery from the afterlife. So, if not the Trickster, then who was this gentleman and why did he stare at Eternity with such hostility?

Immediately, both Originals went to their lovers sides protectively, as the club came to a stand still in fear and uncertainty of this stranger who was an obvious threat. Everyone stopped to stare at him, as the man slithered closer to Eternity, who stared back unafraid and authoritatively. 

“Jor,” the ethereal woman whispered the man’s name darkly.

Jor smirked maliciously, “Hello, Mother.”

To Be Continued....

#elijah mikaelson #daniel gillies #original character #elijah x eternity #klaus mikaelson #hayley marshall #klaus x hayley #rebekah mikaelson #kol mikaelson #finn mikaelson #freya mikaelson #hope mikaelson #davina claire #the originals #the originals fanfiction #the vampire diaries #the vampire diaries fanfiction #romance #drama #alternate universe #alternative universe

[pamphletstoinspire]

A Great Catch: The 153 Fish

“I welcome you on the eve of a great battle.” So began General Dwight D. Eisenhower on May 15, 1944, solemnly addressing the admirals and generals and officers of the Allied Expeditionary Force, announcing the proposed strategy for Operation Overlord, codename for the Normandy invasion. Underestimated as an orator, Eisenhower’s speech riveted the attention of all in the tense atmosphere. The location was an unlikely one: a lecture hall of Saint Paul’s School in London. The boys had already been evacuated to Berkshire during the Blitz. The top brass, who had arrived from the advance command post of the Supreme Headquarters of the Allied Forces at Southwick House in Hampshire, were seated on school chairs, with two armchairs occupied by King George VI and Prime Minister Winston Churchill. General Bernard Montgomery, the future Field Marshall, brought out his maps to show the British and American positions. The school served as headquarters of the XXI Army Group under Montgomery, and he felt at home there because he was an Old Pauline. Planning took place in the office of his old Headmaster, or High Master, which was the title used from the day of the school’s foundation in 1509 by John Colet.

As a close friend of Erasmus, and an even closer spiritual advisor to Thomas More, Colet was the epitome of a Renaissance humanist, laden with learning he had brought back from France and Italy for lectures in his own university at Oxford. More lured him back to his birthplace of London where his father had been a rich merchant and twice Lord Mayor. As Dean of Saint Paul’s cathedral, Colet put his reforming principles to work with eloquent imprecations against the pride, concupiscence, covetousness, and worldly absorptions that had tainted the priesthood. Archbishop Warham of Canterbury dismissed frivolous charges of heresy brought against Colet by offended clerics. Colet’s combination of charm and audacity engendered the respect even of Henry VIII, despite his bold preaching against the king’s French wars. As a priest with no children of his own, and no nieces or nephews because all twenty-two of his siblings had died in childhood, Colet devoted much of his inherited fortune to founding Saint Paul’s school for teaching 153 boys literature, manners, and, with Renaissance flair, Greek on a par with Latin. Erasmus said that when Colet lectured he thought he was hearing a second Plato. If so, his Platonism was Christian. He wanted a great catch, similar to the 153 fish that the apostles had hauled in at the command of the Risen Christ. The boys would be welcome “from all nations and countries indifferently.”

The catch was great indeed, and since then the school has turned out graduates including, just for starters: John Milton, Samuel Pepys, John Churchill, G.K. Chesterton, three holders of the Victoria Cross, and the astronomer for whom Halley’s comet is named — all rising from the first 153.

Exegetes, sometimes with too much time on their hands, and even earnest saints, have teased 153 and other numbers into signifying possibly more than their meaning. Jerome tried to find some significance in the fact that the second-century Greco-Roman poet Oppian listed 153 species of fish in his 3,500 verses about fishing, the “Halieutica,” dedicated rather sycophantically to the emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus. Of course, Oppian was wrong in his counting; besides, he wrote after the compilation of the Gospel. Augustine found that 153 is the sum if the first seventeen integers, which may reveal nothing more than his skill at arithmetic. In his devotion to the Rosary, Louis de Montfort found something prophetic between the catch of Galilean fish and the sum of fifteen decades of Hail Mary’s plus the first three beads.

There may be no end to such agile mental exercises, and I once wrote a book — Coincidentally — rather whimsically illustrating how it is possible to detect endless matrices if you try hard enough. For example, faddish New Age fascination with the esoteric numerology of Kabbalah cultism can strain minds. It may not have been a helpful influence on the popular singer who gave millions of dollars to a Kabbalah institute and recently was confined to a mental health facility purportedly against her will. Carl Jung wrote at some length about what he termed “synchronicity” and warned that an obsession with “acausal principles” could unbalance reason. Yet even a detached observer might pause at the fact that the Sacred Tetragrammaton appears 153 times in Genesis.

The point here is that there are many levels of meaning in divine revelation that may be clues to the operation of Divine Providence. “For I know the plans that I have for you, plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope” (Jer. 29:11). Even our limited mathematics may articulate something of the symmetry by which the pulse of Creation may be taken: “‘To whom then will you compare Me, or who is My equal?’ says the Holy One. Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who has created these things, who brings out their host by number” (Is. 40:25). Perception of this saves the saints from madness and inspires them to awe.

Contemplation of the unity of the True God and True Man encounters layers of reality beyond the comprehension of human intelligence. Nonetheless, we can perceive the existence of those dimensions. A “Participatory Anthropic Principle,” first forwarded by John A. Wheeler, suggests that the universe is structured with a set of physical constants or “cosmic coincidences” without which there would be no intelligent life on Earth, and that it is only by participating in that structure by rational perception that the constants or coincidences have their potency. So there may be in those 153 fish the Voice saying: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now” (John 16:12).

It would be a mistake to suppose that the apostles went back to fishing in disobedience to the Master’s command years before that they drop their nets and follow him. Christ is the Alpha and Omega, meaning that he is able to know everything from start to finish at the same time. Before the Resurrection, Jesus told the apostles that they would meet a man in Jerusalem carrying a pitcher of water, from whom they would rent an Upper Room: “So they went and found it just as Jesus had told them (Luke 22:13).” Thus he was also able to “set up” his men, ordering them to go to the Sea of Tiberius, knowing what he had prepared for them there, in order to instruct them.

In his humanity he did a domestic thing in cooking breakfast. In his divinity he predicted what the apostles would become. Whatever else may be encoded in the number 153, the fact is that this event happened, for had it been an oriental myth there would have been a million fish. This number was a detail never to be forgotten. Even when the youngest of them, the cadet of the Twelve, was the last to survive and his mind was weary with age, he said with a thrill like that of a youth: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life” (1 John 1:1).

There is one thing we know that prevents miniaturizing Christ as the best of men but only a man: “For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together” (I Col. 16-17). In him was an urgent appeal to the intellect, which for the Jew was a function of love and not confined to the brain, as is clear in the Resurrection appearance to Cleopas and his companion on the Emmaus road: “O foolish ones, how slow are your hearts to believe all that the prophets have spoken. Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” (Luke 24:25-26). Here was the culmination of his earlier rabbinical catechesis: “‘Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don’t you remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?’ ‘Twelve,’ they replied. ‘And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?’ They answered, ‘Seven.’ He said to them, ‘Do you still not understand?’” (Mark 8: 18–21).

The unseen calculus that fascinated Oppian when counting fish in coastal Cilicia much more amazed William Blake when describing an imagined “Tyger” which certainly was not rampant in London: “What immortal hand or eye / Could frame thy fearful symmetry?” If there is substance to some anthropic principle in the play of numbers, it is found in the fact that after the 153 fish had been dragged to shore, a small fire was burning as Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. And Peter wept in remembering that by another small fire in Jerusalem he had said three times that he never knew the Man.

BY: FR. GEORGE W. RUTLER

From: www.pamphletstoinspire.com

#a great catch the 153 fish

[hazyheel]

NXT Takeover: New York Predictions

Takeover: New York is shaping up to be the biggest takeover that we have ever had. All of the belts are being defended, including the WWE UK Championship, and all the matches feel like a huge deal. There was a definite snag when Tommaso Ciampa got injured, but the show still seems like it is going to be great. Here are my predictions NXT Takeover: New York.

First up is the War Raiders against Ricochet and Aleister Black for the NXT Tag Team Championships. Simple story here, as Ricochet and Black began to team on the main roster, while still competing in NXT. Because of their success as a tag team on Raw and Smackdown, they entered the Dusty Rhodes Tag Team Classic together, defeating Fabian Aichner and Marcel Barthel, the reformed #DIY, and the Forgotten Sons to win the tournament. That gave them a championship match for the show, against the War Raiders. So, this seems like a pretty easy one to book, because Ricochet and Black are already on the main roster, so they shouldn’t win a title in NXT right now. Plus, they have a match on the main roster for the Smackdown Tag Team Championships at Wrestlemania, so they don’t need the NXT belts. So War Raiders will retain in what should be a fun match.

Next is Pete Dunne vs. WALTER for the WWE UK Championship. WALTER confronted Dunne on his first night in the company at Takeover Blackpool, beating down Joe Coffey in the process. He gathered up some wins in the coming weeks, before teaming with Dunne in a match against the Coffey Brothers. The two won, but there was a serious tension there. Dunne then requested to fight WALTER for the championship at Takeover New York, and the match was made. WALTER is definitely coming away with the win here. Dunne has held the title for so long, they need someone massive, both in size and popularity, to beat him for the belt. Short of the main roster, WALTER is the only one who fits that bill. It should be a great match, with a really historic finish given the length of Dunne’s title reign. This is the match that I am most looking forward to. 

Into the women’s division, there is a fatal 4-way between the champion Shayna Baszler, Kairi Sane, Io Sharai and Bianca Belair. After Belair lost to Baszler at Takeover Phoenix due to the interference from Marina Shafir and Jessamyn Duke, Belair teamed with Sane and Sharai in a 6-woman tag match. The faces won the match when Sharai pinned Baszler, causing tension between Sharai and Belair. The two had a number 1 contenders match, but Baszler interfered, beating both of them down as well as Sane. As a consequence of her actions, Baszler was put into a fatal 4-way against all of those women. This is a tough one to predict, but I think that Belair is going to take this away. Baszler has terrorized the locker room for a few months now, and while I don’t think that it is time for her to be called up just yet, I think we need a babyface champion. Io Sharai could also win, but I am picking Belair because of the Sky Pirates’ affiliation with the women’s tag division, belts that they definitely need to hold in the future. So, Belair is probably going to get the win here, but there are so many moving parts that I can’t say that 100%

For the NXT North American Championship, Velveteen Dream takes on Matt Riddle. This is a simple feud, where Riddle continued to express his want for a title match, with Dream refusing each time. Dream finally accepted his challenge after a series of wins, but became startled when mindgames did not work on Riddle. This is another tough one, but I am going to go with Dream retaining, because Riddle hasn’t been in the company all that long, and Dream really should be getting some wins on Takeovers. He has a pretty bad record at the event, so he deserves this win. Plus, Riddle is more of a main event guy. His first belt should be the NXT Championship, after he takes out a big heel.

And finally, in the main event, Johnny Gargano takes on Adam Cole in a two out of three falls match. The match was originally going to be Gargano against Ciampa (reportedly in a title vs. career, or career vs. career match) but Ciampa had to go in for neck surgery, meaning that the feud will be put on hold for a while. Adam Cole qualified for the match by beating Velveteen Dream, Matt Riddle, Ricochet and Aleister Black in a fatal 5-way. This is a simple bullying storyline, with Cole telling Gargano that he isn’t good enough and never will be. Plus, the Undisputed Era will probably be at ringside, further stacking the deck. But that doesn’t matter, Johnny is the ultimate underdog, and this is his time. He has spent some time meandering away from his feud with Ciampa, and this was almost the perfect time for the story to come to an end. But, life got in the way, so we have this. Johnny should still win, and maybe him against Ciampa in a ladder match later down the line. Johnny deserves this win, and I cannot wait to mark out for it!

So, those are my predictions for the show tomorrow. Every match looks really great, but I am probably most excited for the WWE UK Championship match, because WALTER is awesome and it will be a historic moment to see Dunne unseated, plus a great match. However, I always love watching Matt Riddle, and the vacant NXT Championship does offer some intrigue in the main event. This could easily be the best Takeover show ever (although most of them have that potential) and I can’t wait for tomorrow!

#wwe #hazyheel #pro wrestling #pro wrestling predictions #wwe predictions #nxt #nxt predictions #nxt uk #nxt uk predictions #nxt takeover #nxt takeover predictions #wwe nxt #wwe nxt predictions #wwe nxt uk #wwe nxt uk predictions #nxt takeover new york #nxt takeover new york predictions #gargano vs. cole #riddle vs. dream #baszler vs. belair vs. sane vs. sharai #war raiders vs. ricochet & black #dunne vs. walter

[pantstomatch]

I really liked how you wrote the a/b/o dynamic in your last fic. It wasn't some thing that overruled and defined everything about the characters, which is so awesome because I doubt many people - Stiles especially - would deal well with that. Anyway, i thought I'd washed my hands with a/b/o fics but it's sucked me back down again. Do you have any fic recs?

thank you so much! that fic was super fun to write, and I loved cramming in all my favorite tropes :)  I’m a big fan of a/b/o, idek why, but I love it. I’m sure all the ones I’d rec are well known, but here’s a list of some of my favs in no particular order.

we can take our time by KouriArashi

Tact and social mores are completely relegated to the back of Derek’s brain, and without thinking, he blurts out, “Did you spend your heat alone?”

Stiles’ head jerks around in surprise, and then he flushes pink and looks away. His voice comes out brusque and unfriendly. “Not that it’s any of your business, but I spend every heat alone.”

Knot if You Don’t Knock by jsea, marguerite_26

Stiles never expects to present as an omega – that’s something that happens to people like Greenberg, not him. He is so wrong.

His life only gets stranger when Derek Hale mistakenly bursts through the door of his exam room during a doctor’s appointment. What happens next is a complicated series of events, including freshly baked cookies, book-carrying and surprise heats.

Build an Ivory Tower by teot 

Stiles didn’t know how Derek sleeping on his floor developed into sleeping in his bed, or how cuddling ended up turning into Derek humping his ass. He didn’t agree to being knotted in the school locker room, either. But what can you do when Derek Hale wants something? He’s the Alpha, after all.

You Smell Like Mine by bleep0bleep, marguerite_26 

People talk about the alpha instinct, an alpha’s head being swayed by a nice-smelling omega, or the desire to drop everything and show off. Derek’s never felt any of that. He’s just not that kind of alpha.

Then he meets Stiles.

Say It With Me (Don’t Assume) by orphan_account (I’m pretty sure this is by KuriKuri, does anyone know if this was abandoned on purpose or not, since they’re’ still on AO3 with other fic?)

Derek knows way too much about how omega heat suppressants work now, after having been partnered with Stiles for as long as he has. They’re probably his favorite thing to bitch about whenever they’re stuck on a stakeout. Of course, omegas on the force aren’t required to take them. Derek’s never really understood why Stiles does, if he hates them so much, especially –

– especially because he’s bonded.

#omegaproblems by subnivean 

Stiles didn’t need an alpha. He might want one, though.

The Sanctuary by chase_acow

Stiles runs away during his first heat, right into the waiting and ambiguously scary arms of the Alpha’s nephew, Derek Hale. He doesn’t have any choice except to submit, but along the way, he digs up a mystery that threatens his family and even the town’s safety.

Old Traditions, Werewolf Edition by Footloose 

Stiles does not work his Omega ass off to attract frat boy Alphas. Absolutely not. He’s at college to get his degree. If he’s crushing on an Alpha who never crosses the lines of propriety, well, no one needs to know, right?

Mix and Match by Jerakeen 

Stiles walks into the Beacon Hills alpha-omega mixer with a smile on his face and three condoms in his wallet.

monday i can fall apart but by friday i’m in love by tryslora

It’s just past five in the morning and Stiles is barely awake, wearing only sleep pants that hang low below his pregnant belly, and he can’t get the damned brand new jar of decaf coffee open. But he has a neighbor, and he’s too tired to think that waking someone else up at this hour might not be the best (or politest) of ideas.

Someday Came Today by Fatebegins

“March 2, 1810…Today, I met the man I’m going to marry.”

At the age of eight, Genim “Stiles” Stilinski showed no signs of Great Beauty. And even at eight, Stiles learned to accept the expectations society held for him–until the evening when Derek Hale, the handsome and dashing Alpha of the Hale pack, solemnly kissed his hand and promised him that one day he would grow into himself, that one day he would be as beautiful as he already was smart. And even at eight, Stiles knew he would love him forever.

But the years that followed were as cruel to Derek as they were kind to Stiles. Stiles is as intriguing as the Duke boldly predicted on that memorable day–while Derek is a lonely, bitter man, crushed by a devastating loss. But Stiles has never forgotten the truth he set down on paper all those years earlier–and he will not allow the love that is his destiny to slip through his fingers . .

Rare Books and Special Collections by KuriKuri

Derek Hale hates libraries.

Unfortunately, not all books can be ordered on Amazon.

(Or: in which Derek is a grumpy omega writer, and Stiles is an annoyingly attractive alpha special collections librarian.)

The One With The Mail-Order Brides and A/B/O Dynamics by Stoney

Wolves aren’t meant to be alone. Laura tells Derek this repeatedly. Which… is why Derek knows he’s losing his mind, as Laura has been dead for more than six years. Wolves aren’t meant to be alone.

And so he sends away for a companion. JUST for a companion, not for a mate. The universe, however, has a different plan in store for him.

here comes trouble by grimm 

All Derek wants is one day where he can sleep without worry of being woken by gunfire, without the threat of death hanging over his head. He wants a full stomach and no pain clinging to his bones, no ache in his feet from months of running. He wants a shower, a safe place to put his head. He wants his family, the healing comfort of pack. He’ll never have any of that again.

You’re a Mess, But You’re a Catch to Me by jsea

The laws are clear: omegas are required to have an alpha guardian. So when the sheriff gets shot, Derek is roped in to stepping up as Stiles’ temporary alpha while he recovers.

Derek knew it was going to be a bad idea, but he never could have predicted all of the ways that Stiles would end up turning his life upside down.

Worth the Wait by Dexterous_Sinistrous

Stiles always had a thing for Derek, but then again, so did everyone else. Stiles just wanted to be seen as different, which was why he waited.

But maybe he waited a little too long.

Can’t Be Saved (Not So Frail) by weathervaanes

“Kira doesn’t care a wick if you can afford her dresses and bonnets, I’m well aware. It doesn’t change the fact that I have to look after her best interests. I’d like her to be with an Alpha that puts her above all else even if he cannot afford her every luxury.”

Scott looks surprised. “I know you do not know me, sir, but I can promise you that that is my only wish. I—I love Kira quite dearly, and all I want is to provide for her, make her happy.”

“So you will marry off your brother,” Derek says, taking a sip from his drink.

-0-

In which Kira is Derek’s ward, Stiles is Scott’s brother, and omega heat cycles are good for everyone.

Fight Fires In Your Best Clothes by standinginanicedress

The key isn’t actually being confident, he repeats in his head in Lydia’s breathy voice. It’s faking the hell out of it and looking as sexy as possible while you do it. For omegas, it’s easy. There’s a natural charm to all of us that only takes seconds to engage, and barely takes practice.

Walk into the room, he chants in his head. Own it, and look people in the eyes. Find the best looking alpha, have them buy you a drink, and the rest is easy.

Fallen for You by Mynuet

Stiles is not swooning when his hot next door neighbor comes to his rescue. He’s not! Maybe a little.

Survival of the Species by Lissadiane 

“I think I’m dying.” Nothing makes sense – and now Derek has left him.

“No, Mr. Stilinski,” Deaton says grimly, rooting around in his special cupboard of herbs and remedies. “I’m afraid not. You’re merely suffering from a biological imperative to bear your alpha’s children and strengthen the pack.”

Stiles considers that for a moment, as best he can with his mind a hazy mess, and then he says quietly, “I think that might be worse.”

“So, so much worse,” Scott agrees.

*In which Derek’s pack is apparently stable enough to begin planning for the future, and somehow, the universe has decided Stiles is the perfect candidate to bear his alpha’s children.

i need your sway by thatworldinverted

Stiles always figured it would be Scott who saw him through his first heat. They pinky-swore on it, in fact, when they were eleven and newly-presented. There haven’t exactly been an abundance of offers between then and now.

What there is now, though, is the pack, and pack takes care of each other.

How to Woo Your Local Omega by alocalband

Stiles knows a pity gift when he sees one. Mostly because that’s all he’s ever gotten from anyone since the moment he hit puberty.

I don’t know why, but I guess it has something to do with you by LunaCanisLupus_22

“You smell like me,” the guy says, scowling as he crowds in and Stiles staggers back between the coats and finally hits the wall. “Why do you smell like me?”

He barely lets out a garbled sound as the blood rushes to his cheeks. “No reason,” Stiles yelps, struggling to get his footing and grasping at a whirlwind of puffy fur.

Or the one where Stiles goes thrift shopping and steals an alpha’s shirt. And gets a lot more than he bargains for.

#anon #replies #fic recs #sterek #a/b/o dynamics #teen wolf

[impossiblepostchild]

IN MEMORY f REMEMBRANCE THE HOLOCUAST-BLACK LIVES MATTERS-911-2001-VETERANS COMMEMORATIVE DAY-NATURAL DISASTERS-INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM and etcetera

Hello All Beloved Kindred Spirits.

I will welcome to hearing from Senior Council Executives, Presidents or Rabbis and leaders within the Jewish Community from around the world as well as Palestinians including BLACK LIVES MATTERS Senior Decision Makers overseas and or within my local chapter CALISTA WA 6167-AUSTRALIA.

Please note I do not communicate with degenerate computerized Daleks from Dr Who-ever Machines asking for petty donations hence why so many disasters went viral out of control past and present to date. Same applies to dealing with insignificant office clerks too busy polishing their nails, drinking tea all day or now a days too busy texting to friends for selfies.

I will also welcome to also hearing from all Executive Councils of Thoughts and Conscience from around world’s: GOVERNMENT (Presidents-Prime Ministers and Royal Members of Sovereign Countries) wishing peace of and for future survival with ongoing intentions to never forgetting history’s Dark Matter as in Space: WORLD’S MEMORIAL GOVERNANCE of REMEMBRANCE that we NOT FORGET the FORGOTTEN LOST of past, present and future.

This is also with regards to this horrific bloodshed against innocent people, children and animals caught up in the middle east at present. I am indeed sorry for this ongoing dispute which I fear will escalate to WW3 which I hope not as if we haven't enough to worry about such as this pandemic, shortage of natural resources, the economy with worse to follow such as weather patterns of the CURSE KIND in addition to an asteroid heading our which is not a question of IF but WHEN perhaps within 47 to 80 years from now.

On a positive note of Hope, I intend to go ahead with: IN MEMORY of REMEMBRANCE with Love, Compliments and Compassion against all odds and oppositions but alas I alone cannot move this MOUNTAIN of HOPE alone towards PEACEFUL-ACCOMPLISHMENT hence Teamwork is necessary for all to be involved to be nominated for THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE with my support and blessings. No not me as I have already made PEACE with GOD which by then I shall be 86 enjoying my final contribution as a philanthropist via my creation of:

“THE PEOPLE’s SYMPHONY of REMEMBRANCE”

And other related short works/songs Live New York 2026 with world-wide TV coverage of this special one off Multi-Million Dollars Historical fund raising event coinciding with “JEWEL-A-THON” in presence of President Joe, World Leaders, Royalty and Celebrities front row heading a mass audience of several thousand-w-tickets from $21 to $2.1 million dollars to commemorate the tragic year of 911-2001: World Trade Center.

Thank you for reading this whereas I will look to communicating with a REAL PERSON of good authority and not by some insignificant office clerk dismissing my Intentions as a scam in: Our world of suspicion, paranoia, superstition so on but by the same token in contradiction to asking funds for prayers which sad to say did not save 6 million Jews did it? in addition to another 30 million lives lost during WW2 and counting for God help those who help others by action not prayers for selfies. This includes superfluous chatter meetings after meetings while we are all suffer and die away slowly in agonizing sufferance: A C T I O N THE K E Y to OVECOME EVIL IN SACRAFICE.

Remember: the MIND LIKE A PARACHUTE CAN ONLY FUNCTION WHEN IT OPENS for IMAGINATION IS BETTER THAN KNOWLEDGE: SURVIVAL: THE MOTHER of ALL INVENTIONS and the wittiest thus ANYBODY WHO IS ANYBODY IS NOBODY, BUT ANYBODY WHO IS NOBODY IS SOMEBODY hence I hope it is you-The Reader SEEING THE PICTURE by reaching out to me IN MEMORY of REMEBRANCE which is nothing compared to colonizing Mars within its barefoot soil.

So, meanwhile, take care, stay safe, God Bless and Musically Yours. Jan Anthonisz. (1941-2041) The Silent Christian: Producer: Composer: Artistic Director: Coordinator. For more detailed information, please feel safe to contact me direct: [email protected] (Calista WA 6167) Call / Text: 61 (Australia 0) 466 370 484

It’s okay I’m user friendly and fear me not as I am use to the occasional death threats from some of these Looney Prunes hence in God I trust-In other’s I don’t (as written in my Mini-Bible aged 7 and how true to this very day) (Humility-Simplicity-Trust-Believing in Yourself as Faith is the Key with admirable selfless action towards others not prayers)

So please make your donation to a center near you NO NOT ME. Thank you as I am trying to lose weight

Ps: I make no apology to being blunt-outspoken especially when it comes to SAVING LIVES as life is too short to play games that children do-chasing rainbows. Thus, it appears if I may cause offence by being direct which for I'm renowned for so what? For this is not about you or your beliefs but THE LIVES and FUTURE OF OTHERS-ANIMALS-EARTH or what’s left of it.

Many laughed and under estimated Hitler and look what happened plus other tragedies to date which sad to say some folks may take my views and predictions out of context personally as this is not about them as I reiterate but those suffering with agony to death. Too many academic Derelicts out there who have lost the plot now that Donald Duck Trump has recovered from: OPEN HEART PERJURY who is now a BIDEN-ning his time for his:

“2nd Coming of The Reich Kind”

since Mary had a little lamb. Now her cats are everywhere: POLITICIANS and RELIGIOUS LEADERS in SHEEP CLOTHING just like the KKK. (Finger Trigger Happy.) So sad so many are still brought up what to think not how to think. Same applies what believe not how to believe.

Ten (10) things all politicians have forgotten: Common Sense. NOT GOOD. BLESS YOU and THEM ALL. JAN ANTHONISZ: Producer: Composer: The Silent Christian like all animals and children with suckling innocence. Cell Direct: 61 (Australia) 466 370 484

[lizzybeth1986]

Note: Since this post is about group scenes, and Book 2 is still ongoing, I will be updating this essay as and when a group scene appears in the book. As with Book 1, I will be concentrating mainly on the portions that include Liam.

ETA: COMPLETED

--

Bathhouse/Spa Scene

Technically the spa is free - the part that costs diamonds is crashing the “boy’s” side and getting to spend time with your LI if you’re going for Drake or Liam. It also gives us some great insights into Maxwell’s past, by revealing his hippo tattoo.

Like Liam, Maxwell appears to have been very close to his mother and remembers her fondly for the unconditional support he recieved from her (calling him her “little hippo”, telling him that hippos were strong and tough). Both Liam and Maxwell have similar backgrounds - privileged upbringings that nevertheless had its negative effects, lost their mothers at a young age, and as adults they cling to those memories in varying ways.

The scene then diversifies into time spent with Drake/Liam, depending on who the reader ships. The encounter with Liam can go two ways - one is the romance option: a massage followed by some stolen kisses (the MC still manages to kiss him if she so chooses a few minutes later, even if she doesn’t choose the massage), and the other, more neutral option: asking Liam about the “raising a barn tradition”. I’d like the elaborate on the latter, because I believe it raises some very interesting points.

Today I’d like to talk about Liam not in respect to his relationship with the MC, but instead to his relationship with the reader. Whether one chooses him as an LI or not, he is our main link to this fictional kingdom. He is the reason our character gets the opportunity to travel to Cordonia in the first place. Book 1 is about his social season. Throughout the series, we see Cordonia through the eyes of someone who is completely new to the place (the MC), and in that position Liam (as Cordonia's future/current king) is our main source of information to truly building a worldview of this place.

Now, all the prominent characters in their own capacities help the MC understand the country. Hana, Maxwell and Bertrand help us understand the rules, norms and conditions of high society within the kingdom (for instance, making us understand how important apples are to the economy), Drake gives us a unique perspective of the royal court through Savannah’s experience, Olivia in her one diamond scene gives us an insight into Cordonian history that will prove to be important later.

But Liam, in his capacity as Prince and then King, gives us an insight into the heart of the country, its culture, why it is the way it is, why things happen a particular way here.

At the Masquerade, he elaborates on the importance of the social season, warns us about the fierce competition, and reveals how dangerous instability within the royal family can be.

At the Regatta, he recounts the history of the boat race, and talks about Cordonia’s ties with its neighbours. Sharing this historical tidbit saves the MC a lot of embarrassment while dealing with the press.

At the Forgotten Falls, Liam narrates a love legend. This may not have much to do with Cordonian politics or the court, but love legends are part of a country’s cultural fabric.

At the ruins, he talks about history and how his father views his place in it, and wonders what mark he will leave on his kingdom.

Here, after building the barn, he briefly touches on Cordonia’s agrarian roots, but more importantly, helps us understand that the start to a new couple’s life is a community effort in Cordonia - that not only are the couple or their families part of raising the barn, but also their friends, neighbours and peers. Whether this applies to all, or even some, aspects of Cordonian society, is something we may only learn over the course of book 2.

Liam, in telling us these stories that don’t seem to important in that moment, allows us to chart Cordonian history and culture, and gives us an insight into the way the country works. He is our source of information for many of its cultural anomalies, and gently guides the MC - who cannot always relate to their way of life - into knowing how to tackle things and what to say.

In a sense, Liam is our Encyclopedia Cordonia 😂

The MC’s Journey

I’m just going to leave this bit of dialogue here:

MC: When you put it that way, I'm not sure if it's an amazing advanture or something I'd barely survive.

Liam: Most great things in life are a little bit of both, if only metaphorically.

If this isn’t a summary of what the MC’s entire story in The Royal Romance is, I don’t know what is.

Fondue Party Scene

This scene takes place in Italy, during Madeleine's bachelorette party celebrations and after she has thoroughly humiliated Hana. The purpose of this scene, therefore, is to cheer Hana up and make her feel less of a failure than she already does.

As with the Truth or Dare sequence in Book 1, Liam doesn't feature in this sequence, possibly for two reasons: a. Possibly kingly/political duties, and b. He also happens to be the fiance of the bride whose bachelorette party it is, making it even more unlikely that he will be close by, unlike Drake and Maxwell.

However, he does feature in a childhood story Drake tells us, of the two playing hide and seek in the palace as kids. This story highlights Drake's competitive nature (not coming out of the laundry chute for hours because he didn't want to lose) and Liam's tendency to panic/worry when he cannot find people close to him.

This is possibly a trait that has followed him to adulthood, if his appointing of Drake as the MC's bodyguard is any indication.

Camping Scene

The camping scene takes place as a breather for the group, coming right after a charged sequence where the MC gets to ask Queen Mother Regina about her involvement in the plot and learns about her filial relationship with Adeleide. The MC needs time to come to terms with these revelations and arm herself for the next confrontation, and the rest of the group need to be away from court drama. It is Drake, the camping veteran, who suggests exploring a campsite.

Liam is more relaxed and himself in this sequence, watching his friends tend to a stray lizard and offering help to set up the tents. While helping the MC with hers (if she so chooses to let him), he talks of going camping with Drake often enough that he would have to know how to build a tent and fend for himself if he had to survive. Later, he tells her about getting lost while camping, and being found by Drake afterwards. This sequence helps us understand two things about Liam:

1. The Liam - Drake dynamic. Liam jokingly tells us, early on in the book, that Drake "never lets me get away with anything", and that that is his favourite thing about him. Liam sees Drake as someone who keeps him grounded, and as a person who has had his back when he has needed it, such as the boat rescue and the lost-at-camp story. Later in New York, Drake buys Liam a compass as a wedding gift, hoping that if Liam is to ever feel like he will lose his way, the compass will remind him of who he is, and what he hopes to achieve.

2. It also gives us a glimpse into how truly lonely Liam can be sometimes, and why he holds his friendships so close to his heart. Liam is the only one in the group known to be so intensely involved in court, and he can find no genuine friends there. Maxwell is involved only to a certain extent as is Hana, and we aren't completely sure yet how involved Drake is, even though he may be more involved than he lets on.

Liam cannot trust easily. He has learned long ago that there aren't a lot of people he can genuinely rely on. So he holds on to the few friends he has like a drowning man to a raft. He needs this group as much as they need him, because he knows these people care for him as a person and worry about his well-being.

Shanghai Panda Reserve

The group scene at the panda reserve begins with a scenario where only Liam is allowed inside the enclosure, given his privilege as King of Cordonia. If the MC and her friends convince Xinghai to let them join him, this scene is unlocked.

This scene does not have any specific signifcance like the Night Market scene later on in the chapter, but is more of a fun activity involving cute animals.

Liam, particularly in this sequence, shows his characteristic ability to communicate well with animals: introducing the group to Yue Yue and Yang Yang, happily carrying them around, predicting correctly that hunger may causing their change in mood. Liam's ability to connect with animals is a recurring theme in the books: he is shown speaking affectionately to the horses in the stable just prior to the Fox Hunt in Book 1, cares for the MC's horse (if she buys it) while she is gone, has an instant connection with the corgi when they meet in Paris - to the point where he is able to train him for the proposal in New York and is adored by the pandas in the short time that he is there.

Coney Island

The trip to Coney Island takes place shortly after the MC's name has been cleared, and is planned as a way for the group to celebrate the MC's victory over the scandal that nearly ruined any chances of her staying in Cordonia. This - along with the Beer Garden sequence - are meant to lull the characters into a feeling of false security, a feeling that everything has been worked out and they don't need to worry anymore. But even in this relaxed atmosphere, there are signs that things will soon take a turn for the worse.

The most prominent part of this sequence is the scene in the fortune telling booth, where each of our main characters get varied fortunes. The most confusing so far is Liam's, which is the only one written in the form of a verse. We will explore what this fortune could possibly mean in a separate essay.

Liam confesses to wanting to go to the circus/carnival from time to time, but tells the MC later at the Ferris Wheel that he had "only hoped to see the circus, not join it. My youthful rebellion had its limits". Why is this particular statement interesting? Because his older brother Leo, in RoE Book 3, relates to us a story of how he desired to be part of the circus as a young boy, and how Liam wanted to be his assistant. Yet here, Liam tells us that he was more comfortable with enjoying parts of it rather than actually joining it. In a lot of ways, one can see the circus as representative of the world outside Cordonia: while Leo feels trapped in his role as Crown Prince and desires freedom from it, for Liam it is a part of who he is. The outside world represents everything Leo could possibly want from his life. Liam, however, is happier with having freedom in small doses - his joy lies in simple moments where he can shed his role for a while, but not completely because in being King, being protector and guardian of his country, lies the core of his identity. It may not have been a role he may have always wanted, but one cannot deny that it's who Liam is. So while Liam may enjoy thr circus/outside world from a distance, he may never truly be a part of it.

Other moments involving Liam include him joining the others in a high-striker competition (and reaching only the halfway mark), a cute childhood story about how he used to give titles to all his soft toys (when one has the power to grant titles, why let it go to waste?), and an offer to buy cotton candy for everyone. I see the last as his way of caring for the group: he tends to match Hana when it comes to looking after them, individually and together (an example of this would be him ensuring that Drake is well-taken-care-of when he goes to play pool in Paris, and his offer to help build tents).

Beer Garden

The Beer Garden sequence is seen as the last chance the group will have to interact together before the Finale, and is seen as a breather they take before the Homecoming Ball the next day. Almost half the court makes an appearence here, including former ladies-in-waiting Kiara and Penelope, and noblemen Neville and Rashad.

Much of the scene is provided to the player for free, even allowing us time to have a chat with Bertrand about what happened in Paris. The sequence is extended if the rest of the group manage to convince a reluctant Liam to stay back and enjoy the festivities, and involves plenty of drinking and dancing on a table.

In this sequence, we see Liam preferring to be a distant observer who isn't very keen on dancing alone. He tells us that he is not altogether comfortable doing so, which comes as a surprise (considering the MC remarked that he was an excellent dancer during their first waltz together).

This is similar to how he acted at Drake's birthday party at the American bar in Applewood: he has to be pushed to "show a move" during the celebrations, and seems more comfortable doing a slow romantic dance with the MC. Here, too, he needs the MC's encouragement to climb on the table and dance along.

This reminds me of a dialogue said by Madeleine during her bachelorette, when the court ladies explain to her that this is their first time at a club. We don't all have the luxury of engaging in such gauche behaviour. Liam would have been brought up in a similar manner, perhaps with even more stringent restrictions. It would not be altogether surprising if his inability to dance outside of choreographed waltzes requiring partners has more to do with not having enough opportunities to let loose very often.

#the royal romance #trr liam #king liam #king liam the sexy #trr maxwell #liam: diamond scenes #bathhouse scene #liam the encyclopedia cordonia #fondue party scene #italy #camping scene #france #panda reserve scene #china #coney island scene #usa #beer garden scene #cordonia

[panbloglodytes]

From the effects of Victoria Frankenstein

To the women who have survived me, I have buried this letter deep, like flesh in ice. But every secret is revealed in time. When you read this I will be deader than the Monster ever was: ground down to bones no scientist could rouse. Perhaps my work is widely known, now. Perhaps it is regular that people are built by others; perhaps you were built our of the dead yourself. Or perhaps it is all of it forgotten, as I may be, as the Monster himself became in the end. I understand the secrets of giving humanity life. But I never quite understood the things we would choose to do with it. It is hard to write a letter to a completely unknown place. Our language may be the same – though perhaps it is not – but the ideals under which our lives are lived may be entirely separate. I am too good a scientist to pretend to predict the future. The things about which I speak may be alien to you, unknown. But there is a chance that they are not, and I wish to prepare for the contingency. Solutions are always worthwhile, even when the problems may not be there. And so. An alias, Victor Frankenstein. A part of me does feel shame in it. In a world where women of science are scorned, to be able to come forward as one! I see no use for modesty; my mind was the greatest of the age. I came from a school of thought where life and death were separate categories; to turn the dead into the living was something only God himself could do. To conceive of it was blasphemy enough, but to achieve it!? It is no coincidence that I was slurred as mad. Now, in my dying days, I hear organic chemicals have been formed out of dead matter, of material that was never alive. The intelligentsia still shudder at this: the thought that the living and the dead are not so different carries a terror, even now. Small wonder that the Monster is only known as a monster; that my work became only a whisper of what it should. But my point is that a whisper is enough. Frankenstein is still mentioned in the same breath as Maxwell and Darwin, though he seems a jot more reclusive than those two! And his work is mentioned in terms of its achievement. Men talk of his knowledge of nerve fibres, his surgeon's skill in restitching them. They do not think to ask if he could have had a child himself. Because the Monster was not his child, but his creation― and that is only true because he is a man. Were Victor Frankenstein a woman, then the woman is all that they would see. Why would a woman make human life in this way, when she could bear it herself in her womb? What reason would she have to knead the flanks of a dead man's flesh, and was her curiosity truly scientific when she did? I know the arguments well; they have played in my head a thousand times. I know a woman could never be respected for bringing the dead back to life. But perhaps I am not respected now. Shelley's doctored account of my Monster has frightened so many of the impressionable, and it is a common belief that Doctor Frankenstein is insane. But then that itself is a victory! If I am mad it is called hysteria, and it is thought to be because of my body. The world knows that Victor is mad, and they know it is because of his mind. You see, the world is material fact, but I am a fact it cannot yet deal with. Both woman and Monster existed in a world that refused to believe that they could. Already there are those who refuse to believe Shelley's account, to call it fiction. To most, it would seem incredible that such a discovery could just be forgotten by the world, but then I am an expert in hiding enormous things. It would bring me some sorrow if one half of my life's work were lost to future science. But it would bring me joy to know my greater project succeeded. Because the story of Frankenstein is not the story of a woman. It is the story of man, in the sense that includes me and you and the millions of other women forgotten by the term. It is about our dreams of conquering the world, and perhaps our folly in trying it. It is about the world being repulsed by our minds, and never pausing to think of our bodies. And so my greatest success is that the world now knows that Frankenstein is not the name of a woman. Frankenstein is the name of the Monster. Yours, Victor

#Halloween #frankenstein #frankensteinsmonster #fiction #fanfiction #I mean #I guess it still counts as fanfiction when its about Frankenstein?

[lightningnose]

FROST WATER: Tell me, Ratleaf, as a Healer of your clan, RiverClan, how are your duties? How does your Clan view such a presumably estimable position? How do you see signs from your ancestors and spirits? Do you speak with them? Have you ever received a momentous sign?

Ratleaf: Greetings, Frost Water. I thank you for your inquiries into my work.

My tasks are many. It is my task to gather herbs and tend to my Clanmates in all manners of life. I tend to their physical well being, for instance by helping those prone to overworking and encouraging them to rest sufficiently. I tend to their spiritual well being through means such as helping the Queens teach the Kits about StarClan and the Spirit Kits. I tend to their mental health by supporting those in need; for instance, I provided support and assistance and comfort to Buzzardpelt – a former Elder – he walks with StarClan now – who at times suffered through tremendously grievous nightmares and battle flashbacks. I am also tasked with burying those who pass on to StarClan before me. Fortunately I have not had the task of disposing of a body belonging to a Forgotten cat; they, by their betrayal, have opted out of an honourable burial. I pray I will never have to make such a burial. My duties are many; indeed, the ones I have listed only barely sum up my tasks. Other duties include but are not limited to advising my Leader and Deputy on various matters, helping Apprentices rearrange Den bedding and nesting for the comfort and needs of the inhabitants, and performing ceremonies to bless all who enter this world, all who leave this world, and all who pass from one Rank to another. I am also bound to tend to those in need from other Clans if it is required. My duties go beyond Clan boundaries. However, I would not trade my work for anything in existence. I love serving my Clan so. I care little for hunting or fighting, though I am adept, and political matters interest me little if they do not impact the well-being of my Clanmates.

My Clan is grateful for the work I and all cats of my rank do or have done or will do, regardless of Clan. The other Clans are also grateful for Medicine Cats. No Medicine Cat is more or less important than any other. Regardless of suffix, we all tend to the Clan. We all bury the departed. We all give blessings and speak with StarClan and Spirit Kits and advise the Clan and more. We are to the Clan as a stem is to a plant; hardly noteworthy, but without the stem the plant could not grow, and without Medicine Cats the Clan would die. The Clans all acknowledge this reality and highly respect all Medicine Cats, be they past, present, or future.

I communicate with StarClan and the Spirit Kits through a variety of methods. By far the most common is the case of a Spirit Kit – or multiple, as the case may be – appearing and requesting – at times demanding – to speak with me. The Spirit Kits serve as intermediaries between the realm of the living and the realm of StarClan. At times, StarClan cats appear to me in my dreams. Usually it is only one, and usually this is only because I have made a request to meet with them so as to discuss a matter that I feel I cannot possible decide on by myself. Naturally, when Cloverclaw was my Apprentice – fully named or not – she also partook in these dreams. She of course participated fully in all requirements of her job.

Signs outside of dreams are extremely rare. Signs within dreams may well be StarClan’s way of having others beyond my dreams tell me their opinions on my matter. It is why I spend time in that Dream realm even after my discussion partner has departed. Often there are signs left, indicating what other StarClan cats feel about my issue of discussion.

A sign outside of a dream indicates that something incredibly misfortunate is in the works. If I recall correctly, Alderface of WindClan received a Sign of Warning shortly before a Forgotten Leader moved to drive out WindClan. This warning gave them time to prepare and fend off the invasion, proving their strength and right to exist on those moors.

Such major signs are vague but understandable. A Sign of Warning, for instance, takes the form of a dream involving a harmful matter; a forest fire, for instance, or a completely frozen river. Alderface has told me that the Sign of Warning he saw was an abandoned, fruitless moor.

These major signs do not, however, give the specifics of what harm may befall the Clan. This is because StarClan does not see all. We observe the living and may make predictions based on what we see that others may not; however, things may turn out in an unpredicted fashion. Not all major catastrophes are preceded by a Sign of Warning, for instance, because not all major catastrophes can be predicted by StarClan.

I am thankful that I never received such a major sign.

#Ratleaf #medicine cat