Ancient Egyptian pregnancy test survived millenia because it worked (2018)
science.howstuffworks.com
science.howstuffworks.com
That's because almost nothing was lost when the library at Alexandria burned. Because there was almost nothing there to burn at the time. The library had long been in decline by this time period, and there were many other great centers of learning in the world which had extensive libraries. Why does this myth still persist?
> That's because almost nothing was lost when the library at Alexandria burned. Because there was almost nothing there to burn at the time. The library had long been in decline by this time period, and there were many other great centers of learning in the world which had extensive libraries. Why does this myth still persist?
Because it's a rather romantic myth, and it's repeated by influential people in still-prominent works (e.g. https://old.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/1nqrl0/carl_sag...).
The actual source howstuffworks.com cites for that section doesn't mention the myth (https://sciencenordic.com/denmark-videnskabdk/unpublished-eg...). My guess is the "freelance science writer" who wrote this piece interpolated it for color from a memory of a pop-science source like the one in the critique above.
I've spent my whole life believing that it was a disaster when the library at Alexandria burned. Is it possible it wasn't a big deal? How do we know?
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/pluginfile.php/437863/mod...
The short of it is that Alexandria, including its libraries, declined as a center of scholarship after Ptolemy VIII exiled or killed all the intellectuals who worked there in 145 BCE. While the library survived, subsequent administration didn't maintain the institution. Whatever insults the physical institution suffered or when the buildings were finally destroyed, the institution of legend died from neglect long before then.
Also papyrus has a limited shelf life, so even the books need to be maintained (copied) to maintain them in the long run, so if the institution is failing, the books will be lost in the medium/long term, even without direct destruction of the library
History for atheists by an atheist historian. Lots of references in this article.
> After over ten years of seeing supposed “rationalists”, most of them with no background in or even knowledge of history, using patent pseudo history as the basis for arguments against and attacks on religion, I felt someone needed to start correcting the popular misconceptions about history which are rife among many vocal atheist activists. I also felt there needed to be some push-back by a fellow unbeliever against several fringe theories and hopelessly outdated ideas which have no credibility among professional scholars and specialists, but which seem to be accepted almost without question by many or even most anti-theistic atheists.
The problem is that we have no reliable references on the destruction of this library. Written sources contradict each other, and archaeology has nothing.
- According to 3 Roman authors, Julius Caesar burned it. But other Roman authors vigorously deny it. - Even if no book did burn at this time, centuries of decline followed. The town's activity went down, and other libraries had greater fame.
- When Aurelian took the city (anno 272, thanks Wikipedia), the building was certainly destroyed (among many others) if it still existed.
- There were very late claims that the library was destroyed be the Arab invasion, but this is extremely unlikely since the written sources on the library's activity stopped just before the probable destruction by Aurelian.
In France most people believe in an Arab destruction. For instance, this well known newspaper had to write an justification[^1] after many readers denied the destruction by the Romans mentioned in a previous article. I suppose it is not a mere coincidence that the prejudice against Arabs is very common in this country. [^1]: https://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/1990/02/10/qui-a-bru...
"The actual numbers were probably lower, perhaps by as much as one order of magnitude"
Reference to this says "a library that was a tenth of this size [sc. the 500,000 in Ps.-Aristeas] would still have been very large in antiquity") so it was a large library. I have to say, claims of hundreds of thousand weren't really plausible anyway.
Second it doesn't say it was dwarfed elsewhere at the time. It does say "The Library of Alexandria, however comprehensive for its time, was not on a scale comparable with the great research libraries of the twentieth century[0]". Which is fair, but doesn't support what you say.
finally it doesn't say (that I can see) that it was empty when destroyed. The guy does say there's now way it would have survived a long time due to the humidity and climate it was in, but doesn't suggest (AFAIKS) that it was nearly empty when it was destroyed.
[0] well duh
So I'm going to go with the more common view for now. Thanks anyway.
Copying books back when you had to do everything by hand and doing so fast enough that you could return the book in time? I would expect less "hard to distinguish" and more "barely legible".
I'm mostly surprised that they cite two previous experiments by Manger (1933, "Untersuchungen zum Problem der Geschlects diagnose aus Schwangerenhamn" https://www.gwern.net/docs/biology/1933-manger.pdf ) and Hoffmann (1934, "Versuche zur Schwangerschaftsdiagnose aus dem Harn" https://www.gwern.net/docs/biology/1934-hoffmann.pdf ). Who knew? Truly an example of Cowen's second law.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280624411_Germinati...
http://www.veterinaryworld.org/Vol.3/March/Seed%20Germinatio...
The Magician and Leech by Warren R Dawson doesn't seem to be online. Which makes it seem like a pretty cool book.
I see no proof their was an ancient Egyptian pregnancy test, all articles seem to revolve around the one story. Seems like a back history story.
Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob is online (page 11 onwards for the gynaecological scrolls, it's interesting)-
http://www.etana.org/sites/default/files/coretexts/15145.pdf
They used 48 samples
* 2 male -> no grow
* 6 non-pregnant females -> no grow
* 40 pregnant females -> 12 no grow | 5 poor grow | 23 grow
Mi guess is that in the press article they calculate 28/40 = 70%.
By repeating the test every few days, and looking at the patterns of grow/no-grow you would probably get a much better result.
Regarding false positives - since you’re detecting hormones that are not produced outside of pregnancy time, then the only possible reason for false positive could be some genetic condition, or maybe some serious endocrinologic disease, maybe ovarian cancer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marthe_Voegeli
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat-based_contraception
> It has long been observed that men who work in professions that expose them to heat in the nether regions: bakers, cooks, steamworkers; have had a hard time fathering children. Interestingly, men in these professions were observed to start having children after retiring or finding a new job. Based on these observations, Dr. Martha Vogeli [sic, her name ends with 'e': Marthe] ran a long set of experiments starting in the 1940’s in India. After trying all possible combinations, Dr. Vogeli found a consistent method for inducing temporary infertility in men by a series of hot baths. In short, men who sat in hot water for 45 minutes a day for 3 weeks were protected for at least 6 months.
~ https://www.dontcookyourballs.com/heat-based-contraception-n...
I'm mad it wasn't well known enough that everyone happens to know it.
Also cycling.
But it is obvious that the temperature of the balls matter. This is why we put it outside the body, have a special device (the ball sack) to keep it at the right temperature, and then load the whole structure with sufficient pain signals that the man will be very protective of it. Given that the temperature matters that much, it isn't surprising that making it too warm anyways is likely to create infertility.
b. Long ago, I read that wearing jockey shorts rather than boxers put one at a slightly higher risk for testicular cancer, presumably because the jockeys keep the freight warmer. Now, the risk of testicular cancer is pretty slight to start with, but I whether the hot-bath method raises it.
Coincidence? I think not
> Japan is one such country that discrepancy between intended and observed levels of fertility is relatively large. For example, calculated from a nationally representative survey in 2010 (IPSS 2011), the average number of intended children among women aged 40-44 is 1.84, while their observed cohort total fertility is estimated to be 1.48 . These discrepancies between intended and observed fertility suggest social constraints on meeting intentions.
With other forms you can see results via period activity reduction or increasing (in case of copper IUD) or physical breakage or feeling changes.
I’d be more interested in how this affects sauna cultures. In particular Korea where it’s quite common to sleep in a sauna (jimjilbang) for a couple hours. Although people don’t do it daily.
This could be why I have no kids.
Sauna works differently than hot bath. In sauna you sweat profusely in order to maintain your body temperature, and your blood vessels expand, and the heart works hard actively pumping the blood thus avoiding local overheat of any specific body part. Plus you take a cold shower or jump into cold water right out of sauna :)
>to sleep in a sauna (jimjilbang) for a couple hours
nobody can sleep in sauna for a couple of hours :) The best i saw some few guys did in the local Korean sauna is about 30-40 minutes at 180F. In Korean jimjilbang there is also usually something like a room with warmed floor where you do go for a nice relaxed sleep after/between sauna room visits. Damn that coronavirus lockdown, i haven't been for the sauna for like 6 weeks already...
You're right, I should have been more clear. I was referring to the warmed floor area you mentioned. I've spent quite a lot of time in jimjilbangs back in Seoul.
Currently in Tokyo...Once the travel restrictions are lifted, I'm on the first thing with an engine headed back to Seoul!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2211252/pdf/brm...
Another recent article: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/doctors-used-to-us...
One family noticed their barley was sprouting, while another's didn't. Shortly after, the family with the sprouts had a baby. It could have taken generations for this to be actually used as a pregnancy test.
Women generally have a good idea, perhaps some women started to observe it as they maybe didn't want more children and didn't want men to know about it and we worried about each and every possible indication that could reveal it.
Urine was (and is) considered to be strong magically tied to the person, so it was on focus for shamans and priests since ages. And used in combination with many other materials, to heal, to foresee, to curse ..
And given, that urine does contain many personal informations, there is truth to it ..
Also, the weeks of pregnancy are important. This test is useful proably in before the week 6, but I think the homones level change with time.
> One of the oldest descriptions of a pregnancy test comes from ancient Egypt, where women who suspected they were pregnant would urinate on wheat and barley seeds: If the wheat grew, they believed, it meant the woman was having a girl; the barley, a boy; if neither plant sprouted, she wasn’t pregnant at all. Avicenna, a 10th-century Persian philosopher, would pour sulfur over women’s urine, believing that the telltale sign was worms springing from the resulting mixture. In 16th-century Europe, specialists known as “piss prophets” would read urine like tea leaves, claiming to know by its appearance alone whether the woman who supplied it was pregnant.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/06/history-h...
For some demographics you might get a 70% success rate with something as stupid as "Have you been trying to get pregnant for a few months? If so assume you are."
From plant to combine/harvester, to wagon, to bin, to truck, to elevator, to railcar/barge, to mill, to bag should be an approximate path. I'd say that someone peeing on the bag is most likely to be a problem and you'd notice that. In all other cases, a single person peeing on a couple tons of grain isn't very likely to matter. The ground up dead rats probably affect it more.
IOW, there are bigger things to worry about.