Journal

May. 1st, 2013 07:43 pm
therealpm: (Haters to the left)
[personal profile] therealpm
My attempts to ascertain the original cause of my erstwhile lycanthropy not withstanding, this week has been reasonably productive.  Though the legislation surrounding lycanthropes will never be brought to a full vote in either House (how could it), there are various committees that decide on such matters and intensive lobbying is at last beginning to bear fruit.  Not, I will admit, intensive lobbying conducted directly by myself.  I suspect any overt moves made in such a direction would be immediately regarded with suspicion, but Fowler has taken up the cause with what might be considered alarming alacrity.  Though he (and indeed every other member of such a committee) will never be convinced of a werewolf's right to roam, he has at least instated an inherent right to life provided the lycanthrope is willing to take the daily potion, and removed the restriction barring partners from becoming a lycanthrope's legal guardian.  Small steps, perhaps, but welcome.

I therefore intend to spend some time improving the daily potion.  At present it is challenging, though not impossible, to brew correctly, and it has a rather repulsive taste.  I suspect DEFRA consider the sedative and weakening effects to be a feature, rather than a problem, but I suspect that taken over a long period it causes a gradual degardation of health.  This too must be addressed.

The exact combination of ingredients required is yet to be discovered, but given the healthy links I have maintained with various research institutions, acquiring any particular root or grub should not present too much of a problem.  The main difficulty will be finding a test subject.  I can of course use mice for the development stage, but they give so little feedback, and in any case, once the formula is past development and into trials, I will need humanoid test subjects anyway. 

I wonder how that scottish island community is getting on?

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-02 05:20 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Hmmmmm)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
Of course not. But I do believe that you consider it possible to circumnavigate the legislative boundaries to allow yourself to experience a state of being - for whatever reasons - without the backlash of legal consequences.

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-02 06:26 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Not impressed)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
That is not important. The issue is whether I believe such theoretical actions to be wise. I do not.

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-02 06:39 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Angry)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
If I were to come into contact with any evidence which would suggest that these hypotheticals were to become reality, I hope you are aware of the actions I would be forced to take.

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-02 06:51 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Oh for goodness sake...)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
*John isn't stupid - he's fully aware of the various layers of subtext hidden in the conversation. He's just not sure how to adequately express his concern.*

*He stutters, trying to get the words out.*

I... It's not that... Peter, surely you must... I mean it's clear... Of all the solutions...

*He pauses, looks at Peter. He sighs.*

*John rushes forward and hugs Peter, eyes closed.*

Please. Cease these contrivances. Your cessation of being would be most undesirable.
Edited Date: 2013-05-02 06:56 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-02 08:27 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Oh for goodness sake...)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
*John takes a step backwards. He coughs, trying to regain some composure.*

If that isn't too much trouble.

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-02 08:44 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (huh?)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
*By the time Peter comes through with the tea, John has divided the plans into different piles - "Not ethical", "Not practical", "Not advisable" and "No". He takes the offered tea from Peter and begins to go through his reasons for rejecting Peter's plans.*

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-04 07:48 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Hmmmmm)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
*They spend the next half an hour bickering over details - Peter managed to get a "Not ethical" moved to "Not advisable" and John gets a "Possible" to "No". John can sense himself getting too wrapped up in the argument - he's losing sight of the big picture. Peter can't just go about conducting experiments in the middle of London that could result in free-range werewolves.*

I hope that all these hypothetical plans have the same starting safe-base of precautions. For a start, a remote, enclosed and highly protected place for them to take place.

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-04 08:02 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Not impressed)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
In that case I assume there would, theoretically be the same sort of backups in place that were involved in that incident?

As for the experimental elements, as I am sure you are aware a number of these proposals fall under the Living Experiments Act (1948) and so a license would need to be granted by the proper authorities. I assume that these theoretical proposals would adhere to the very non-theoretical, necessary regulations in this area?

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-04 08:48 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Strike a pose)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
That does not mean they comply with the regulations.

Yes, Peter, while the original Living Experiments Act (1948) was limited in its scope, I am sure you are fully aware of its later amendments - the 1962 additions brought those who were alive at any stage during the procedures under its remit, while the 1977 changes extended the regulations to those deemed to have a "half-life". The additions your government introduced in 1998 allowed for the Living Experiment Definition Commission to be set up in order to constantly reassess the act and its scope. As per the 2010 Living Experiment Definition Commission Half-Decade Report, People of Change are included in the regulations. Since the proposals were only adopted in 2012 and were not planned to come into effect until this financial year, DEFRA did not need to have a license during your time of change, but these theoretical plans would indeed require a permit.
Edited Date: 2013-05-04 08:50 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-04 08:55 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Hmmmmm)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
It's most comforting to know that we are discussing theoreticals.

Any experiment which wished to stay legal must have full consent of all those involved, as I am sure you know.

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-04 09:05 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Not impressed)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
..."Non humanoid lycanthropes"?

Peter, that's a preposterous notion! What would be afflicted with the condition? A mouse? Can you image a set of mice with lycanthropy?

What if they got lose, Peter? It would be nearly impossible to catch them all again before they turn! And what of the genetic ramifications in the real world scenario? Have you thought this through at all?

(no subject)

Date: 2013-05-04 09:16 pm (UTC)
bamfbercow: (Angry)
From: [personal profile] bamfbercow
There are procedures in place and lines of accountability for those other experiments, Peter! None of the theoretical proposals have taken those things into consideration. There needs to be back ups and appropriate benchmarking structures and all manner of other regulatory boundaries!

Besides which, Peter, these experiments most likely fall under animal cruelty regulations and lycanthropic specific regulations and regulations regarding changed state individuals.

(no subject)

From: [personal profile] bamfbercow - Date: 2013-05-04 09:31 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [personal profile] bamfbercow - Date: 2013-05-05 06:54 am (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [personal profile] bamfbercow - Date: 2013-05-05 01:04 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [personal profile] bamfbercow - Date: 2013-05-05 02:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
Page generated Jan. 2nd, 2026 11:33 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios